Can the federal government require you to buy broccoli? Or sleep for at least eight hours a night? That’s the question being posed to the Supreme Court about the legitimacy of the health care reform act, which requires all U.S. citizens to buy health insurance or face penalties, according to a story by Adam Liptak of The New York Times.
The Obama administration has had a hard time answering that question, writes Liptak, and they’ve been trying to find answers as they fight in courts around the country on just how legal this is. Earlier this month a Washington, D.C. federal appeals court upheld the law, becoming the second court out of four to do so, according to a story by John Schwartz also of The New York Times.
And if the Supreme Court agrees to take the case, which it could as early as today, according to Liptak, “the (questions) are likely to emerge again.”
The case, according to Liptak, focuses on whether Congress went above and beyond its constitutional authority in enacting parts of the law. Two lower courts found that it had. And even those judges in lower courts who ultimately voted to uphold the law, Liptak writes, have zeroed in “on the question of the limits of governmental power, at times flummoxing Justice Department lawyers.”
“Let's go right to what is your most difficult problem,” Liptak writes that Judge Laurence H. Silberman, who later voted to uphold the law, told a lawyer at an argument in September before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. “What limiting principle do you articulate?” The broccoli and sleep question comes up again. If Congress may require people to purchase health insurance, Liptak writes the judge asked, “What else can it force them to buy? Where do you draw the line?”
Liptak writes that the debate continued when Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, who ended up in dissent, then leaped in with, “How about mandatory retirement accounts replacing Social Security?”
“It would depend,” the lawyer representing the government said, according to Liptak.
Part of the administration’s defense is that it believes the health care market is unique. “And they have suggested that questions about constitutional limits can miss the point,” Liptak writes. He adds that currently, the only question before the courts is whether the particular law under review was within Congress' authority, the administration said, “and other cases can be decided as they arise.”
The debate has been going on for some time. Minutes after President Obama signed the health care legislation into law, 13 state attorneys general filed a federal lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality.
Deborah DiSesa Hirsch is an award-winning health and technology writer who has worked for newspapers, magazines and IBM in her 20-year career. To read more of her articles, please visit her columnist page.Edited by
Jennifer Russell
