Post date: Mar 26, 2012 8:30:9 PM
WASHINGTON, DC, UNITED STATES (MARCH 26, 2012) ( POOL) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday (March 26) appeared prepared to decide the fate of President Barack Obama's sweeping healthcare law rather than delaying for years a review of the mandate that Americans buy insurance or pay a penalty.
U.S. Supreme Court appears prepared to decide the fate of Obama's sweeping healthcare law rather than delaying for years a review of the mandate that Americans buy insurance or pay a penalty.
During the first of three days of historic arguments, the justices voiced doubt that a U.S. tax law requiring that people pay first and litigate later should delay the legal challenge to the president's signature domestic legislative achievement.
At the core of the law, signed by Obama in 2010, is a requirement that people obtain health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty.
The question on Monday was whether people can challenge this so-called individual mandate before paying the penalty and seeking a refund.
The nine justices, five appointed by Republican presidents and four by Democratic presidents, plan to hear six hours of arguments over three days. They are expected to rule on the case by late June.
In Monday's arguments lasting nearly 90 minutes, several justices asked skeptical questions about whether the penalty was indeed a tax. If not deemed a tax, then the justices could move forward to decide the merits of whether the law was constitutional.
"Here, Congress has nowhere used the word 'tax'. What it says is penalty," liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said, referring both to lawmakers who crafted the legislation in Congress and to their intent.
Another liberal Democratic appointee to the high court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, also expressed skepticism.
"What can't be enjoined is an assessment for the purpose of raising revenue. The Tax Injuction Act does not apply to penalties that are designed to induce compliance with the law rather than to raise revenue. And this is not a revenue-raising measure, because, if it's successful, nobody will pay the penalty and there will be no revenue to raise," she said.
Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia was also among those justices who suggested by his questions that allowing the case to go forward would not broadly undercut federal tax policy.
"There will be no parade of horribles," he said, noting that lower court judges would be able to determine when to make exceptions to the usual rules governing general tax penalties and law.
The law, intended to transform healthcare for millions of people in the United States, has generated fierce political debate. Republican presidential hopefuls and their party colleagues in Congress have vowed to roll back the law, which they say will financially burden states, businesses and individuals.
The law has been viewed as the crowning achievement of Obama's domestic legislative agenda, but challengers, including 26 of the 50 U.S. states, say Congress exceeded its constitutional power to regulate commerce with the so-called individual mandate.
They argue that government should not meddle so deeply in people's lives and force them to pay for a product they have opted against. The Obama administration counters that virtually every person will need medical care and that those who shun insurance put a disproportionate burden on the system.
Outside the white-marble Supreme Court building across from the U.S. Capitol, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum called a news conference to promise that if elected, he would get Congress to pass a law eliminating Obama's healthcare overhaul.
"There's one candidate in this race who can actually make the contrast that is necessary between the Republican position, the conservative position and one that is overwhelmingly supported by the American public and one that Barack Obama believes in. And that's Rick Santorum," he said.
Obama is seeking re-election on Nov. 6.
In the United States, annual healthcare spending totals 2.6 trillion U.S. dollars, about 18 percent of the annual gross domestic product, or 8,402 U.S. dollars for every man, woman and child.