All over the country, lawsuits challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are working their way through the federal courts. KHN is tracking the status of 22 cases, below, and will update those and other new cases on this page.
• Court overturned law or part of law: 2 cases (jump to)
• Court ruled law constitutional and dismissed case: 3 cases (jump to)
• Court dismissed for lack of standing or procedural problems: 3 cases (jump to)
• Court dismissed but gave plainiff right to refile: 1 case (jump to)
• Court decision pending: 13 cases (jump to)
<a name=”overturned”> </a>
COURT OVERTURNED LAW OR PART OF LAW
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/floridaflag176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”118″>
Primary Plaintiff: State of Florida (joined by 25 other states)
Judge & Court: Roger Vinson, Northern District of Florida
Current status: Vinson declared the law unconstitutional on Jan. 31, 2011. In his ruling, Vinson struck down the entire law after finding the individual mandate unconstitutional, because “the Act, like a defectively designed watch, needs to be redesigned and reconstructed by the watchmaker.”
The government is expected to appeal to the 11th Circuit and has asked Vinson for a clarification on whether his ruling prohibits states from moving forward with implementation while the ruling is being appealed.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/virginiaflag176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”118″>
Primary Plaintiff: Commonwealth of Virginia
Judge & Court: Henry Hudson, Eastern District of Virginia
Current status: Hudson declared the individual mandate unconstitional on Dec. 13, 2010. The government appealed the ruling to the 4th Circuit. The appeal is scheduled to be heard between May 10-13, 2011.
In his ruling, Hudson wrote, “Neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market.”
On Feb. 8, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli sought to bypass the 4th Circuit and asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider an expedited review of Hudson’s decision. The government has until March 14 to respond. Legal analysts expect the government to oppose the review, which means it is unlikely the Court will take the case up early.
<a name=”dismissedconst”> </a>
COURT RULED LAW CONSTITUTIONAL AND DISMISSED CASE
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/libertyu176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”58″>
Primary Plaintiff: Liberty University
Judge & Court: Norman Moon, Western District of Virginia
Current status: The court dismissed the case on Nov. 30, 2010; Liberty appealed to the 4th Circuit on Jan. 17, 2011. The court will hear arguments during its May 10-13 session.
The judge rejected the argument that the Commerce Clause can’t compel people to buy health insurance because that would be regulating inactivity. He wrote: “Far from ‘inactivity,’ by choosing to forgo insurance, plaintiffs are making an economic decision to try to pay for health care services later, out of pocket, rather than now, through the purchase of insurance.”
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/tmlc176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”96″>
Primary Plaintiff: Thomas More Law Center
Judge & Court: George Caram Steeh, Eastern District of Michigan
Current status: The court dismissed the case on Oct. 7, 2010. Thomas More appealed to 6th Circuit on Dec. 15, 2010. The case is to be heard between May 30-June 10. The judge rejected the argument that the Commerce Clause can’t compel people to buy health insurance because that would be regulating inactivity. He said choosing not to buy insurance has an impact on health care providers and taxpayers and, therefore, is an example of “activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.”
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/aclj176.jpg?w=176&h=113&as=1″ align=”right” width=”176″ height=”113″>
Primary Plaintiff: Margaret Peggy Lee Mead (brought by the American Center for Law and Justice, Jay Sekulow)
Judge & Court: Gladys Kessler, District of Columbia
Current status: The court dismissed the case on Feb. 22, 2011.Kessler upheld the individual mandate, writing: “The individual decision to forgo health insurance, when considered in the aggregate, leads to substantially higher insurance premiums for those other individuals who do obtain coverage.” Plaintiff filed an appeal to the D.C. Circuit on March 1, 2011.
<a name=”dismissedstanding”> </a>
COURT DISMISSED FOR LACK OF STANDING OR PROCEDURAL PROBLEMS
Primary Plaintiff: New Jersey Physicians
Judge & Court: Susan Wigenton, District of New Jersey
Current status: The court dismissed the case on Dec. 8, 2010. New Jersey Physicians appealed to the 3rd Circuit. The judge denied the plaintiffs’ argument that the law would prevent physicians from accepting direct payments from patients and that patients would be penalized if they chose not to buy health insurance.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/liblegal176.jpg?w=176&h=35&as=1″ align=”right” width=”176″ height=”35″>
Primary Plaintiff: Anthony Shreeve (class action filed by Liberty Legal Foundation)
Judge & Court: Curtis Collier, Eastern District of Tennessee
Current status: The court dismissed the case on Nov. 4, 2010. The judge dismissed the argument that there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government authority to regulate health care. The plaintiff refiled the case in U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Texas.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/pacjustice.jpg?w=176&h=174&as=1″ align=”right” width=”176″ height=”174″>
Primary Plaintiff: Steve Baldwin and the Pacific Justice Institute
Judge & Court: Dana Sabraws, Southern District of California
Current status: The court dismissed the suit on Aug. 27. The plaintiff filed an appeal directly to Supreme Court, which sent the case back to 9th Circuit. The plaintiff argued the health care law violates individual rights, increases taxes and violates physician-patient privileges, along with violating the Commerce Clause. The district court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the suit.
<a name=”dismissedrefile”> </a>
COURT DISMISSED BUT GAVE PLAINTIFF RIGHT TO REFILE
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/mississippiseal176l.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”176″>
Primary Plaintiff: Mississippi Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant
Judge & Court: Keith Starrett, Southern District of Mississippi
Current status: The court dismissed the case on Feb. 3, 2011 for “lack of standing” concerns. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs didn’t show that their clients would be required to comply with the individual mandate and gave them 30 days to amend and refile their case. The plaintiffs told Kaiser Health News they will meet the deadline and refile.
<a name=”pending”> </a>
COURT DECISION PENDING
Primary Plaintiff: Michael David Bellow, Jr.
Judge & Court: Ron Clark, Eastern District of Texas
Current status: The court is still considering Bellow’s argument that the government has no constitutional right to require him to buy health insurance.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/aaps176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”59″>
Primary Plaintiff: Association of American Physicians and Surgeons
Judge & Court: Richard Leon, District of Columbia
Current status: The government requested an extension of time to respond to the complaint on Jan. 28, 2011. The court is still considering the conservative group’s argument that the government can’t compel people to buy health insurance.
Primary Plaintiff: Kevin Calvey
Judge & Court: David Russell, Western District of Oklahoma
Current status: The plaintiff asked for an extension of time to respond to an Order to Show Cause on Jan. 3, 2011. The former Republican congressional candidate is the lead attorney representing a group that argues they cannot be forced to buy health insurance. The court is still considering the plaintiffs’ arguments.
Primary Plaintiff: Barbara Goudy-Bachman and Gregory Bachman
Judge & Court: Christopher Conner, Middle District of Pennsylvania
Current status: The court ruled it has jurisdiction on Jan. 24, 2011. The court is considering whether the York County couple has a plausible claim that forcing them to buy health insurance is unconstitutional.
Primary Plaintiff: Harold Peterson
Judge & Court: Joseph Laplante, District of New Hampshire
Current status: The court Filed a Notice of hearing on Feb. 3, 2011. On March 10, the court will hear Peterson’s argument that the government cannot force him to buy health insurance.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/uscitizens176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”162″>
Primary Plaintiff: U.S. Citizens Association
Judge & Court: David Dowd, Northern District of Ohio
Current status: The court agreed on Nov. 22, 2010 to hear a challenge to the individual mandate. The judge is expected to rule by mid-March 2011. The conservative group argues that the law violates citizens’ right to privacy and that they cannot be forced to purchase health insurance. The court is expected to make a ruling by mid-March, according to attorney Jonathan Emord.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/pha176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”54″>
Primary Plaintiff: Physician Hospitals of America, Texas Spine & Joint Hospital
Judge & Court: Michael Schneider, Eastern District of Texas
Current status: The court is considering motions filed by plaintiffs on Feb. 1, 2011 concerning the hospitals’ argument that the law violates their due process and equal protection rights, because it would limit the expansion of physician-owned hospitals.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/missouriseal176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”176″>
Primary Plaintiff: Missouri Lt. Gov Peter Kinder
Judge & Court: Rodney Sippel, Eastern District of Missouri
Current status: The Court is still considering the government’s motion to dismiss filed Jan. 18. Kinder argues that Congress can’t require an individual to buy insurance and that the federal government unconstutionally “commandeered” state law by tying federal Medicaid funding to changes in health care law.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/pacificlegal176.jpg?w=176&h=105&as=1″ align=”right” width=”176″ height=”105″>
Primary Plaintiff: Matt Sissel (Pacific Legal Foundation)
Judge & Court: Richard Leon, District of Columbia
Current status: The court is considering the government’s motion to dismiss filed on Nov. 15, 2010 and is still considering the plaintiff’s argument that the individual mandate violates the Commerce Clause.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/goldwater176.jpg” align=”right” width=”176″ height=”69″>
Primary Plaintiff: Goldwater Institute on behalf of Nick Coons, Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., former Rep. John Shadegg
Judge & Court: G. Murray Snow, District of Arizona
Current status: The court is considering a motion filed by plaintiffs on Nov. 16, 2010 requesting a preliminary injunction against implementation of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) in the health law. In addition to arguing that the individual mandate violates the Constitution, the plaintiffs also charge that the IPAB violates the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches. The IPAB is a Medicare cost savings board in the law.
Primary Plaintiff: Independent American Party of Nevada
Judge & Court: James Mahan, District of Nevada
Current status: The court notified the plaintiff that it planned to dismiss case on Feb. 25 if it doesn’t receive additional information. The plaintiff argues the law imposes Marxism on citizens and therefore is a violation of the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. As of March 2, the court has taken no action.
Primary Plaintiff: Nicholas Purpura
Judge & Court: Freda Wolfson, District of New Jersey
Current status: The plaintiff argues that President Obama isn’t a citizen of the U.S., and, therefore, the law is unconstitutional. The Court is scheduled to consider the government’s request to dismiss the case on Feb. 22. As of March 2, the court has taken no action.
<img alt=”” src=”http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/March/02/~/media/Images/KHN%20Features/2011/February/7%2011/oklahomaflag176.jpg?w=176&h=117&as=1″ align=”right” width=”176″ height=”117″>
Primary Plaintiff: State of Oklahoma
Court: Judge Ronald White, Eastern District of Oklahoma
Current status: Suit filed on Jan. 21, 2011 to challenge the constitutionality of the individual mandate.