The Constitution’s text and history, as well as Supreme Court precedent from the founding to the present, clearly support Congress’s authority to pass the Affordable Care Act, including its “individual mandate.”
You are here
Articles & Commentary
A close vote, no matter which way the case goes
Challengers to the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act's minimum coverage provision have a lot to be worried about as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments over three days at the end of March. The surprise? They need to worry about the conservative justices just as much as they do the more liberal members of the Court.
The federal judicial vacancy crisis in America has reached Arkansas, and Sen. John Boozman can do something about it.
The thrust of the recent commentary on [marriage equality case] Perry [v. Brown] portrays the ruling as unprincipled, an attempt to manufacture a narrow ruling without any basis in law. But Justice Kennedy's opinions show otherwise.
The current nationwide health care crisis, which involves close to 20 percent of the U.S. economy, is exactly the sort of problem the founders would have wanted the federal government to solve under the powers given to Congress by the Constitution. The Affordable Care Act addresses issues of national concern — involving the states as partners but offering federal mechanisms of reform where necessary.
Do we need a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC? Should opponents of the ruling pressure the Supreme Court to reverse course, and also seek changes in the composition of the Court through the appointment process? The answer is yes.
Justice Antonin Scalia created a firestorm last winter when he opined that the 14th Amendment does not protect women against discrimination on the basis of sex. The truth is that this view has been, until recently at least, a bedrock conviction of conservative originalists. In that sense then, the bigger news came at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in October when, confronted on his remarks by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Scalia backpedaled and suggested that the Equal Protection Clause did indeed protect women from state-sponsored discrimination on the basis of sex.
Of all the possible outcomes being tossed around as the Affordable Care Act litigation heads for Supreme Court consideration, one is usually overlooked: If the court upholds the act’s constitutionality and its “individual mandate,” it could sound the death knell for the tea party.
Last week, investigators at the Center for American Progress released a bombshell, making public confidential materials penned by energy tycoon Charles Koch for a conference of well-heeled conservative activists this past June. These materials also included an invitation to far-right money men and women to another gathering scheduled for next January, to plan the takeover of the White House in 2012.