Analysis: Supreme Court health reform arguments
Last week the Supreme Court heard three days of oral arguments on the challenge by 26 states and several private plaintiffs to the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. Specifically, the plaintiffs argued that the ACA's minimum coverage requirement was authorized neither by Congress's Constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce, nor by its power to levy taxes. The state plaintiffs also argued that they were being unconstitutionally coerced to participate in the ACA's Medicaid expansion. Read posts by several noted legal experts including Mary Ann Chirba, Timothy Jost, Renee Landers, Wendy Mariner, Alice Noble, Marc Rodwin, Sara Rosenbaum, and William Sage.
- Why Is Healthcare Price Transparency So Hard?
- Two-Midnights Rule Spells Grim Financial Forecast for Hospitals
- Researchers Link ICD-10 Shift to Financial Losses
- EHR Spending Continues, But Jury Still Out on ROI
- 5 Hot Healthcare Ideas from SXSW
- The Trouble with Hospital Price Transparency
- Hospital Groups Strike Back at Hospital Rating Systems
- 4 Marketing Tactics for Hospitals on Instagram
- Hospital CEO Turnover Hits Record High
- Adverse Events from Insulin Prescribing 'An Epidemic'