Skip to main content
LIRA@BC Law

Abstract

From the introduction:

While the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate survived constitutional scrutiny in NFIB v. Sebelius, a Republican president and/or changes in the House or Senate this fall could lead to its demise. As campaigns shift into high gear, the law’s opponents will undoubtedly draw on the strident and jointly authored dissent of Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito. Despite the value of robust debate, relying on the dissent may be problematic due to its misperceptions about the ACA and the realities of health care. Thus, while we considered what we were waiting for in the weeks before the decision, the Court’s ruling raises a new question: “Who Are We Talking About?”

Files

File nameDate UploadedVisibilityFile size
25_A1b.pdf
7 Sep 2022
Public
506 kB

Metrics

Metadata

  • Subject
    • Health Law and Policy

  • Journal title
    • Health Affairs Blog

  • Date submitted

    7 September 2022

  • License
  • Additional information
    • Suggested Citation:

      Chirba, Mary Ann & Noble, Alice. "The Supreme Court Upholds The Individual Mandate: But Who Are We Talking About?" Health Affairs Blog, July 5, 2012.