Ropes & Gray's Early Analysis of Affordable Care Act Supreme Court Challenge

In The News
April 2, 2012

Ropes & Gray closely monitored the historic arguments and provides analysis here. Ropes & Gray will also continue to pay close attention and provide updates on developments leading up to an anticipated decision by the Court in June of this year.

The arguments before the Supreme Court were broken into four separate issues as set forth below:

  • Whether the ACA’s mandate that individuals purchase a minimum level of health insurance is a valid exercise of Congress’s powers under Article I of the Constitution, including the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Ropes & Gray analysis of the day’s oral argument is here, and a transcript of the oral argument is available here.
     
  • Whether the individual mandate is severable from the remainder of the ACA, such that if the individual mandate is ruled unconstitutional, the ACA’s other provisions are still valid. Ropes & Gray analysis of the day’s oral argument is here, and a transcript of the oral argument is available here.
     
  • Whether the ACA’s expansion of the Medicaid program exceeds Congress’s enumerated powers and violates principles of federalism by coercing states into accepting conditions that Congress could not impose on the states directly. Ropes & Gray analysis of the day’s oral argument is here, and a transcript of the oral argument is available here.
     
  • Whether the lawsuit challenging the individual mandate is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act, which prevents challenges to tax laws before they take effect. Ropes & Gray analysis of the day’s oral argument is here, and a transcript of the oral argument is available here.

For more in-depth analysis of and insights on the issues, please go to the Ropes & Gray Health Reform Resource Center, where some of our colleagues from our Appellate Litigation and Supreme Court practice offer their thoughts.