Litigating Federalism and Broccoli - Constitutional Challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Detta är en Uppsats för yrkesexamina på avancerad nivå från Lunds universitet/Juridiska institutionen

Sammanfattning: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a major health insurance overhaul, was signed into law on March 23, 2010. The Act has been challenged on federalism grounds in a number of cases to date. In particular, the lawsuits have targeted the individual mandate provision – a provision that requires most people living in the United States to obtain health insurance coverage or pay a certain amount of money each year. The first purpose of this thesis is to provide an assessment as to whether this provision can be justified under current Supreme Court doctrine. The constitutional challenges raise interesting questions about the nature of American federalism. For example, which are the underlying values that federalism is supposed to serve? What limitations on federal power must Congress abide by? What kind of federalism-based arguments are legitimate? A second purpose of the thesis is to discuss such questions, as they are reflected in the litigation. By identifying two fundamental objections to the individual mandate and by putting the ongoing litigation into context, the reader will hopefully get an insight into some aspects of American federalism.

  HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)