By Lisa Codispoti, Senior Counsel, National Women's Law Center
Cross-posted from NWLC's blog, Womenstake
By now you’ve probably heard about yesterday’s ruling from a federal court in Virginia concerning a challenge to one piece of the new health care law. Judge Hudson’s decision found that Congress exceeded its legislative powers by including the personal responsibility provision in the new law – this is the part of the law that requires everyone to have insurance if they can afford it. Pundits, commentators and editorial pages have all had something to say about the ruling. Here are a few things to know about the ruling, and what it means going forward.
What in the new law was challenged? The Attorney General of Virginia challenged only the personal responsibility provision of the new health care law: only one piece of this very big law. An important piece none the less, (see explanation below), but just one piece.
Ok, so if the Virginia judge found this provision to be unconstitutional, now what? Even though the judge found the provision to be unconstitutional, he limited the impact of his ruling in two very important ways. First, he rejected the argument that the entire law should be thrown out based on just the one provision (without dating myself, why do I feel like singing that Jackson Five classic "One Bad Apple..."). Secondly, he ruled that he would not stop implementation of this provision because there will be an appeal of his decision and the provision doesn’t take effect until 2014 anyway – so no real rush here.
What about the other court cases? And what has happened there? Yesterday’s case is but one of 20 different challenges that have been brought so far –in various federal courts around the country. To date, 12 of those cases have already been dismissed on procedural grounds. Two other cases that challenged the same provision at issue in yesterday’s case found the provision to be constitutional: in Michigan and in another federal court in Virginia. So for those keeping score: of the 20 legal challenges thus far, 12 have been dismissed; and of the 3 cases that addressed the merits of the legal arguments - 2 of 3 judges thus far have found the individual responsibility provision constitutional.
There is another case in Florida that was brought by officials from 20 different states (some governors, some attorneys general). This case will be argued on Thursday. In addition to challenging the individual responsibility provision, this case also challenges the expansion of Medicaid eligibility.
All of these cases right now are being challenged at the district court level – the first step in challenging the law in federal court. Several of these decisions have been appealed to different Circuit Courts of Appeal, which is the intermediate level federal courts, and a necessary step before getting to the Supreme Court.
Why is the individual responsibility provision such a big deal? And why is it important to women? The personal responsibility provision is a very important piece of the new law – that’s why the National Women’s Law Center joined a "friend of the court" brief filed in support of the provision. As we have often discussed- the challenges we all face in the current health care system are complex- and require a comprehensive approach. The new law enacted important insurance reforms– including ending the practice of insurance companies rejecting women due to pre-existing conditions, or charging women more than men for insurance, or higher premiums for people who were sick. The new law also makes insurance more affordable by providing subsidies to help those who can’t afford their insurance premiums. And to help keep insurance premiums low, and ensure the success of the insurance reforms, the law requires everyone to have insurance if they can afford it (and provides subsidies to help those who can’t). Some states have adopted these insurance reforms without the individual responsibility provision – but the result was insurance premiums that were too high for too many people to afford. This meant that people waited until they got sick to buy insurance- which made insurance premiums go up even more. Basically, without the individual responsibility provision, our victory in ending insurance discrimination against women would be hollow because too many people would be unable to afford the insurance.
Ultimately, most believe that the Supreme Court will have their chance to weigh in on these arguments; some are predicting this will happen in 2012. But we and many others are confident that at the end of the day, the law will be upheld. Stay tuned- we’ll be providing updates on our blog and information about the cases as they continue.