Health Care
Supreme Court Health Care Law Challenge Preview, Individual Mandate
Panelists previewed the Supreme Court oral arguments on the constitutionality of the 2010 health care law requirement that people purchase health care coverage by 2014 or face a financial penalty. Michael Cannon and Randy Barnett reasoned that the mandate is unconstitutional, with Mr. Barnett calling it “unprecedented,” “uncabined,” “unnecessary,” and “dangerous.” Elizabeth Wydra argued that the requirement is constitutional on the grounds of the interstate commerce and necessary and proper clauses. Afterward, they answered questions from the audience.
Watch the video here.
More from Health Care
April 24, 2024
RELEASE: Justices Grapple with Scope and Effect of Conflict Between EMTALA and Idaho’s Near-Total Abortion Ban
WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Idaho v....
March 29, 2024
Amicus Briefs Filed in Support of EMTALA, The Federal Right to Emergency Care, Including Abortion, in Idaho v. United States and Moyle v. United States
A broad coalition of amici filed 27 briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court in support...
U.S. Supreme Court
Idaho v. United States
In Idaho v. United States, the Supreme Court is considering whether EMTALA, a federal law requiring hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies, preempts Idaho’s near-total abortion ban in situations where abortion...
March 22, 2024
Supreme Court to rule on FDA approval of abortion drug mifepristone
Call it wishful thinking or strategic amnesia, but just two years removed from its controversial...
March 7, 2024
The Biggest Anti–Abortion Rights Lie Is Back at the Supreme Court
One of the most consistent and adamant claims of the anti-abortion movement is that opponents...
December 7, 2023