The United States Supreme Court announced yesterday that it will not expedite a ruling on the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
It was hoped in many circles that the highest court would step in and settle the matter of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act quickly. Various district courts have ruled both for and against the ACA.
Hoping to get a quick resolution, Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia, had asked permission from the Supreme Court to by-pass the normal appeals process and argue the matter directly before the U/S. Supreme Court.
Cuccinelli argued that under the terms of the ACA, both governments and private businesses are required to spend money implementing a law that might eventually be declared unconstitutional.
Yesterday the Supreme Court denied that request.
A District Court ruled in the case brought by Virginia’s Attorney General that the mandate requiring that all individuals purchase health insurance was unconstitutional.
However, three other district court judges have ruled the mandate constitutional while two have struck down the provision. A district court judge in Florida has struck down the entire law. Curiously a second district judge in Virginia held the mandate to be constitutional.
All of these cases are now pending appeals in various Circuit Courts. The first to be heard will be the Virginia case which is scheduled to be heard before the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals on May 10, 2011.
Why the Supreme Court refused to hear the case quickly
In unusual circumstances the U.S. Supreme Court has the power to by-pass the Appellate Courts and rule on an issue. But it is extremely rare for the Court to take this action. As usual the high court will allow the normal appeals path to play out. The Court may be allowing arguments to develop as time and study will dictate.
Not a political statement
Many will try to imply a political motive to the decision not to expedite. Some will say the Court is allowing the implementation of the ACA to go forward making it harder to rule against it. Some will say that the Court is positioning the arguments to coincide with the next presidential election.
If the cases follow their usual path, they will likely end up on the Supreme Court docket in the Spring of 2012. A decision which might come in early summer would put that squarely in the middle of the presidential campaign.
But no matter how many argue the possible political motivation, the Supreme Court will keep its own schedule and is unlikely to be swayed by suggestions of polItical motives. Above all the Supreme Court respects its place as the independent third branch of government.
What do you think? Post your comments and opinions and join in the discussion. Make your voice heard.
Comments