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.
- Governors Push to Expand Role of PAs, Telemedicine
- 3 More Pioneer ACOs Say They Will Quit
- Top Provider Billing Mistakes Are Changing
- Payer Calls for More Primary Care Docs, Team Care
- Ebola in the U.S.: Reason to Fear, to Hope, to Prepare
- These Algorithms Reduce Readmissions
- Employee Engagement: Make It Meaningful
- Overcoming a Payer Mix 'Nightmare'
- Why Open Payments Irks Physicians
- Open Payments Site Launches to User Complaints