Ep 46: Ruling on the Constitutionality of the Individual Mandate and the ACA episode artwork

EPISODE · Jan 8, 2019 · 19 MIN

Ep 46: Ruling on the Constitutionality of the Individual Mandate and the ACA

from NFP's Insights from the Experts · host NFP's Insights from the Experts

In this episode, Suzanne and Chase review the recent district court ruling that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and, as a result, the entire ACA is invalid. While the ACA remains in place pending appeal, Suzanne outlines the basis for the case, the reason why intervening states had to step in for the DOJ, and why the individual mandate may or may not be “inseverable” from the rest of the ACA. Suzanne gives a basic overview of civil procedure and appeals, and describes the process by which the case here will be appealed. Suzanne and Chase also discuss a bit of constitutional law and the balance of powers — the limitations on courts as they interpret and decide the constitutionality of legislation passed by Congress. The two close with important points on employer obligations while the case is appealed and the potential political fallout with a split Congress and the looming 2020 elections.

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Jan 8, 2019

Embed this episode

NOW PLAYING

Ep 46: Ruling on the Constitutionality of the Individual Mandate and the ACA

0:00 19:10

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

No similar episodes found.

No similar podcasts found.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of NFP's Insights from the Experts?

This episode is 19 minutes long.

When was this NFP's Insights from the Experts episode published?

This episode was published on January 8, 2019.

Can I download this NFP's Insights from the Experts episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.
URL copied to clipboard!