Law Discussion
boyupe
discussion_2-example.docxDiscussion 2-1: Example
Initial Post
The Affordable Care Act tends to get polarizing views. In my personal experience, it seems that those who oppose the ACA are often not fully informed on what it means for all Americans, what the individual implications are, and just how specific it is.
In this particular case, a large portion is dedicated to the individual mandate of the ACA that requires all US citizens to purchase Health Insurance. This was ruled unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. After re-reading the case, I was able to make much more sense of the ruling. This was declared unconstitutional because Congress has the power to regulate commerce, but not to create and then regulate it. By requiring individuals to have health insurance, it would be preventing individuals from not purchasing health insurance. Cogress cannot regulate individuals for doing nothing, or not doing something.
The book provides a great example by demonstrating that while eating vegetables is good for people, we don’t always do it. If Congress were to instead require all Americans to eat vegetables to fix the diet issue, then it would require Americans to buy vegetables. In turn, this would penalize those who do not buy vegetables, which would also be equally as unconstitutional.
This is certainly a complex case. I read it three times just to be sure I understood it and it makes sense. Congress can regulate existing commerce, but cannot regulate the lack of commercial activity. As a supporter of the ACA, it is reassuring to see just how thorough the government has been in putting together a plan that is deemed constitutional.
Professor Comment
Good initial post. As a business law class we should focus on looking merely at the law and how it will be applied. So even thought this law is one that I am sure every person in the class has an opinion about we do not seek opinions here as the the merit of the law merely from a business perspective is it or is it not constitutional. I point this out in hopes this discussion board stays on track in looking at this from a legal perspective.
So Emma's analysis is that the law is unconstitutional when argued on the ground of the Commerce clause. So is it fair to say the Federal Government's power under the commerce clause has limits? If so what are they?
Discussion 2-2: How to start
