PPACA and the Supreme Court: Day two — opinions abound
By Paul Wilson
Americans continued to keep a close on Washington D.C. Tuesday as the U.S. Supreme Court spent the second day of oral arguments on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2012.
Reports indicate that it was a tough day for the individual mandate; however, it should come as no surprise that opinions remain divided on exactly what it will all mean in the long run.
CNN’s legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, says the individual mandate could be in “grave danger,” according to this story.
Meanwhile, likely swing vote Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, “appeared skeptical Tuesday that President Obama’s health care mandate is constitutional,” according to The Hill.
However, Obama administration officials reportedly expect the individual mandate to be upheld, noting that judges who asked tough questions as PPACA made its way to the Supreme Court eventually upheld the mandate anyway.
While there didn't seem to be much good news coming out of the meetings for supporters of the bill, they can take some small satisfaction in an AP story posted earlier this week stating that the loss of the mandate wouldn't spell the end of the law.
Or this piece from The Daily Beast, which argues that a ruling against health care reform could actually be beneficial to President Obama's reelection campagin.
NPR provided a more playful recap of the day, including categories for Best Judicial Asset and Best Food Metaphor.
ProducersWEB members have also weighed in with their predictions and reactions this week. Here's what a few had to say:
“5-4 Decision to revoke the mandate but allow the law to stand. Decisions divided on party lines.” — Nicholas Paleveda MBA J.D. LL.M
“Following two days of arguements the tea leaves seem to favor overturning the Individual Mandate … the most educated guess is a 5-4 decision to overturn the Mandate. Tomorrow, the government will make as persuasive a case as it can that this new power to impose fees on the public for not purchasing insurance is necessary for the greater good...and perhaps it can succeed...but they have an uphill battle based on Kennedy's comments.” — Evan Pennet
“It would be easier to predict the outcome of the SUPREMES decision if it were to be based on the Constitution. However, anyone who has seen some of the decisions by this court has to be aware that it will PROBABLY come down to ideology. For instance, do you think Kagan will vote to overturn something that she had a personal hand in developing? I don't think so.
Will the judges listen to the national feedback that is going on? Will this feedback have an influence?
As a 10+ year health insurance veteran I must say I think it's 50-50.” Sad, huh? — Fred Fortson