By Johanna R. Thibault, Esq.
April 2, 2012
Last week was a big one in the legal world. Lawyers, politicians, law professors, students, and reporters all crowded the United States Supreme Court building hoping to catch a glimpse of oral arguments scheduled regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as the "Health Care Act," or my personal favorite from the Act's opponents, "Obamacare." Everyone in the United States was closely watching. SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) blog received a record number of blog "hits" during its coverage of the oral arguments with over 800,000 views in a single day. If this tells us anything, it's that we are all listening and anxiously awaiting the outcome of this critical case and wondering whether the Act will survive.
On the table is the Act's constitutionality, and the Supreme Court scheduled three days of arguments to address the following questions: (1) whether the Tax Code allows the Supreme Court to have jurisdiction to hear the substantive questions regarding the Act; (2) whether the Act itself was unconstitutional in regards to the individual mandate; and finally, (3) if the individual mandate section of the Act is unconstitutional, whether the rest of the Act can survive.
The Supreme Court decision on these questions is clearly important in a political realm. As nearly every landmark case before the Supreme Court has effects well beyond its subject matter, the environmental lawyer in me is curious to know: Will the decision have implications to environmental laws and legislation as well?
My discussions with others in the environmental law field lean toward, "no." The structure of environmental legislation in the United States does not appear to mirror that of the Affordable Care Act, although a creative academic exercise could undoubtedly result in some instance where the Supreme Court decision on this case might apply.
So, does this important case and potentially monarch Opinion from the Supreme Court provide anything critical for us environmental lawyers? It just might, in the form, at least, of giving us another window into how the Supreme Court Justices might review environmental law cases that come before it in the next several years.
If the Supreme Court upholds the mandate and sides with the Government, it could be a sign that the current Court prefers to follow pre-existing precedent. In contrast, if the Supreme Court decides against the constitutionality of the Act, we could be looking at a Court of extreme conservatism with an unfriendly eye on future environmental cases.
Is the outcome of this case critical to our country? Absolutely. But we might not need worry much with how the outcome of this case affects environmental law and legislation. Then again, we have been surprised before...
April 2, 2012
Last week was a big one in the legal world. Lawyers, politicians, law professors, students, and reporters all crowded the United States Supreme Court building hoping to catch a glimpse of oral arguments scheduled regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as the "Health Care Act," or my personal favorite from the Act's opponents, "Obamacare." Everyone in the United States was closely watching. SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) blog received a record number of blog "hits" during its coverage of the oral arguments with over 800,000 views in a single day. If this tells us anything, it's that we are all listening and anxiously awaiting the outcome of this critical case and wondering whether the Act will survive.
On the table is the Act's constitutionality, and the Supreme Court scheduled three days of arguments to address the following questions: (1) whether the Tax Code allows the Supreme Court to have jurisdiction to hear the substantive questions regarding the Act; (2) whether the Act itself was unconstitutional in regards to the individual mandate; and finally, (3) if the individual mandate section of the Act is unconstitutional, whether the rest of the Act can survive.
The Supreme Court decision on these questions is clearly important in a political realm. As nearly every landmark case before the Supreme Court has effects well beyond its subject matter, the environmental lawyer in me is curious to know: Will the decision have implications to environmental laws and legislation as well?
My discussions with others in the environmental law field lean toward, "no." The structure of environmental legislation in the United States does not appear to mirror that of the Affordable Care Act, although a creative academic exercise could undoubtedly result in some instance where the Supreme Court decision on this case might apply.
So, does this important case and potentially monarch Opinion from the Supreme Court provide anything critical for us environmental lawyers? It just might, in the form, at least, of giving us another window into how the Supreme Court Justices might review environmental law cases that come before it in the next several years.
If the Supreme Court upholds the mandate and sides with the Government, it could be a sign that the current Court prefers to follow pre-existing precedent. In contrast, if the Supreme Court decides against the constitutionality of the Act, we could be looking at a Court of extreme conservatism with an unfriendly eye on future environmental cases.
Is the outcome of this case critical to our country? Absolutely. But we might not need worry much with how the outcome of this case affects environmental law and legislation. Then again, we have been surprised before...
I think you should reconsider. 5 days prior, on 21 March, the Court ruled that administrative orders- even if not yet enforced- are subject to judicial review. Which is virtually the same consideration as one of the challenges to PPACA- can someone sue if they have not yet been harmed (or, in my mind, if they may never be harmed).
ReplyDeleteThis is an insightful comparison, yet I am still going to stick to my initial analysis that the outcome of the PPACA challenges will have little effect on any environmental law or legislation. The EPA case issued by the Court on 21 March held that an Administrative Order was a final agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act subjecting such an action to judicial review. This is a slightly different nuance from the question facing the PPACA case in which the Court is asking whether the AIA of the Tax Code allows for the Court to hear the case on jurisdictional grounds. However, both of these cases demonstrates how the current Court is interpreting legislation, and this can be very important for environmental law - the EPA is learning this the hard way this term! If nothing else, the PPACA decision will give us a feel for the Court's mood.
DeleteWhile I do think it is interesting to see how various rulings can affect other things, what confused me was the "why" of this question: "Will the decision have implications to environmental laws and legislation as well?" What specifically led you to ask the question?
ReplyDeleteThat is a great question, Kelly, and I appreciate your comment. This blog has a primary focus of environmental and administrative law. I suppose the question is somewhat born out of the blog's purpose, but your question indicates to me that this is not evident by what I have written here. I will be more mindful in my future posts to make these transitions a bit clearer. Thanks again!
ReplyDeleteI think the ultimate decision is unlikely to impact the existing environmental regulatory scheme. However, if the law is upheld it opens the door to the future application of individual mandates. Personal behavior is alredy influenced by the availability of tax credits and deductions. For example, investments in home energy efficiency and electric cars are incentivized. Under the tax code these enviornmentally friendly decisions are rewarded with a "carrot," however, the tax code may ultimately be used as a "stick" to penalize non-compliance with environmental objectives.
ReplyDelete