The Act represents a massive change to the country's healthcare system that includes an individual mandate requiring certain individuals to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld this individual mandate under Congress's taxing power. This Comment will examine the implications of the Court's decision on the individual mandate and the Court's taxing power analysis. A primary objective of the Act is to have more Americans covered by health insurance. This Comment suggests the Court's decision may ultimately result in fewer Americans being insured. Finally, contrary to the fears of critics of the Act and the Court's decision, the Comment concludes that the Court's analysis of Congress's taxing power will not open the gates to new congressional mandates. Despite the Court's decision and the re-election of President Obama, much uncertainty still remains about the future of healthcare in America. The Act is here to stay, but its implementation and outcomes are far from certain.
Originally published in February 2013 edition of The Journal of Health & Life Sciences Law – www.healthlawyers.org/JHLSL
For further information visit Waller
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
