Abstract
Numerous actions have been taken in federal courts since 2010 to challenge the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Continued litigation over various parts of the law and its regulations has been a distinctive feature of the law during its first decade. The US Constitution established the federal judicial system (federal courts and Supreme Court) as a check on the power of the legislative and executive branches of government. This chapter reviews some of the key actions challenging the constitutionality of the ACA that have reached the Supreme Court (the final arbiter of the Constitution), and a pending challenge that was heard by the Court in 2020 and will be issued an opinion in 2021.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The National Federation of Independent Business, a business lobbying group, and 26 states were the plaintiffs in the case, and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, as the holder of the cabinet post whose responsibilities lay at the heart of the new law, was the nominal defendant.
References
Buettgens MB. The combined effect of not expanding medicaid and losing marketplace assistance. 2015. Retrieved from The Urban Institute: rban.org/sites/default/files/publication/52736/2000223-The-Combined-Effect-of-Not-Expanding-Medicaid-and-Losing-Marketplace-Assistance.pdf.
Florida Attorney General v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Nos. 11–11021, 11–11067 (Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals August 12, 2011).
Hamilton A. n.d.. The Federal Papers, No. 78. The Federalist. Clinton Rossiter (New York: New American Library, 1961).
Jost T.. What do the courts have in store for the ACA? An update on health reform lawsuits. 2019. Retrieved from The Commonwealth Fund: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2019/what-do-courts-have-store-aca-update-health-reform-lawsuits.
Keith K. Back in (regulatory) action. Health Aff. 2018; Retrieved from https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05223.
Keith K. Texas v. United States: where we are now and what could happen next. Health Affairs. 2019. Retrieved from Health Affairs Blog.
Keith K. ACA litigation round-up: a status check. 2020. Retrieved from Health Affairs Blog: Following the ACA: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200129.210273/full/.
Keith K. Supreme court to hear challenge to ACA. 2020. Retrieved from Health Affairs Blog Series: Following the ACA: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200302.149085/full/.
NFIB et al. v Sebelius, 567 US. 519 (Eleventh Circuit Court June 12, 2012).
Petitioners B. o. Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 132 S. Ct. 2566 No. 11–400). Brief of State Petitioners on Medicaid at 44, , 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012) (No. 11–400). 2012.
Rosen MA. Why broccoli? Limiting principles and popular constitutionalism in the health care case. UCLA L Rev. 2013;61:66.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bishop, S.M. (2021). The Role of the Supreme Court in Shaping the Affordable Care Act. In: Selker, H.P. (eds) The Affordable Care Act as a National Experiment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66726-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66726-9_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-66725-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-66726-9
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)