Read all 3 cases and decide whether you agree with the court’s ruling. Write a one-page response for each case. The response should answer if the ruling is or is not constitutional/ethical and why.
1. King v Burwell
2. Burwell v Hobby Lobby
It struck down the contraceptive mandate. My opinion: It is not ethical for the corporation Hobby Lobby to interfere with their employee’s personal healthcare decisions based on the owners’ religious beliefs (the Green family). It is not right to choose what procedures, treatments, or preventative care they will or will not cover based on the employers’ beliefs. Separating the owner’s identity from that of the corporation’s identity is the whole point of having a corporation, to separate yourself from liability. In my opinion, the ruling interferes with the employees’ rights and freedoms afforded to them by our constitution. This decision allows corporations too much power to impose their religious beliefs on the individuals who work for them. The employer’s religious beliefs are not more important than the employee’s religious beliefs. Also, the employer’s duty to the employee is to provide health benefits as part of the compensation package.
3. National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius
Upheld individual mandate and struck down the mandated Medicaid expansion. First, the individual mandate forces individuals to sign up for healthcare. Those who failed to comply were penalized with a fee, determined when filing taxes. The first thing was to determine if the fee for non-compliance was a TAX or a PENALTY. If it was a tax, individuals could not sue to avoid a tax. The courts ruled it was a penalty because they never referred to it as a tax until the end. It is not a tax as far as the Anti-Injunction Act goes. However, under the constitution, it is considered a tax. Without the individual mandate, the Affordable Care Act does not function completely because not every citizen is participating and contributing to the system.
Second, determine if the Medicaid expansion mandate is unconstitutional. If you do not take this expansion by force, the government said we would take all the Medicaid money out of the state.
The two most important questions are 1- is the individual mandate unconstitutional? 2- is the Medicaid expansion unconstitutional? My opinion: I think they are both unconstitutional. I agree with the ruling that people should not be forced into interstate commerce. A- no one should be forced. B- the healthcare insurance sector, in my opinion, is complicated, inefficient, and expensive. Forcing people to have insurance places them in a vulnerable position where insurance companies will exploit them.
Sources are provided below. Feel free to add more if needed.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/11-393