Justices hear argument that health case is premature

The New York Times, March 27, 2012

At the opening of three days of arguments, the justices' questions suggested that they were receptive to a point on which both supporters and opponents of the law agree: that the court should decide the case now rather than waiting until the law's penalties for not having health insurance become due. On Tuesday, the court will turn to the central question in the case, the constitutionality of the law's requirement that most Americans obtain insurance or pay a penalty. The argument on Monday was a sort of appetizer to Tuesday's main course, a 90-minute debate over whether the court has the authority to hear the case yet, given an 1867 law, the Anti-Injunction Act, that says taxpayers may not challenge taxes until they become due.


MOST POPULAR

SPONSORED REPORTS
SPONSORED HEADLINES

SIGN UP

FREE e-Newsletters Join the Council Subscribe to HL magazine

SPONSORSHIP & ADVERTISING

100 Winners Circle Suite 300
Brentwood, TN 37027

800-727-5257

About | Advertise | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Reprints/Permissions | Contact
© HealthLeaders Media 2015 a division of BLR All rights reserved.