Georgetown law professor: Health care lawsuit backed by Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox has merit

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2010/04/georgetown_law_professor_healt.html ^ | April 7, 2010 | Jonathan Oosting

[fightinJAG]

While several legal scholars have suggested it specious, a prominent constitutional law professor on Tuesday defended the lawsuit backed by Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox challenging the legality of recently-signed health care reform legislation.

Cox last month joined more than a dozen other state attorneys general on a lawsuit filed in Florida that contends the federal government does not have the right to require health coverage and is violating the U.S. Constitution by forcing individual mandates in states without providing the resources to pay for it.

“These claims are highly plausible. Whether they are ultimately successful at the Supreme Court is very hard to predict,” Randy Barnett, the Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Legal Theory at Georgetown, told reporters on a conference call that, as the Detroit Free Press points out, Cox organized.

Echoing the argument he made last month in the Washington Post, Barnett said the mandate requiring individuals to show proof of insurance -- which takes effect in 2014 -- is unprecedented.

April 7, Macomb Daily: The U.S. Constitution’s commerce clause, he said, has never been applied to an economic “inactivity” by citizens — forcing them to purchase a product.

In addition, the professor said the federal threat to withdraw billions of dollars in Medicaid funding to states that fail to comply could be interpreted by the high court as “commandeering” of states’ authority, as the attorneys general claim.

Barnett conceded his views are in the minority, acknowledging many of his peers have suggested the lawsuit lacks merit while questioning whether they'd read recent court decisions involving limits of federal power. Here's what others have been saying:

[ilovesarah2012]

This can’t be true. Why, just last night I heard Keith Oldman say these lawsuits were frivolous and political and a waste of resources.

[mountainlion]

Only 12 states filing law suits? I heard 39 last week who is right?

[beaversmom]

Ping

[ConjunctionJunction]

Maybe the difference is between states who have filed vs. those who plan to file?

[opentalk]

bump

Governor Granholm has been very vocal about defending the healthcare bill and wants to file a law suit to defend it. Given her track record with MI jobs she is the last person to be listened to, will probably end up with a job in obama administration.

[cripplecreek]

Given her track record with MI jobs she is the last person to be listened to, will probably end up with a job in obama administration.

I would bet big money on that. In fact I suspect her role will be as an economic advisor of all things. After all, she was the economic advisor on Obama's transition team.

[opentalk]

After all, she (Granholm.) was the economic advisor on Obama's transition team.

That was a big red alert from the beginning. If you really cared about the economy pick help from Texas.

-- Glad Cox is fighting this.

[DrC]

“Only 12 states filing law suits? I heard 39 last week who is right?”

The first number relates to state attorneys general who have filed a suit against the bill on various constitutional grounds (both the individual mandate and “commandeering” states are issues). The latter figure is the number of states in which a bill has passed or been introduced in the legislature to exempt their citizens from the federal bill. These latter bills also are grounded in constitutional claims: that is, were the federal law viewed as constitutional, I don’t think any of these states would/could defend a system in which states voluntarily get to pick and choose which federal laws their citizens obey. But passing a law is different than filing a lawsuit. Moreover, there’s no guarantee that 3 dozen states have working majorities that would permit passage of such laws.

[gigster]

Hey Crip,

Would you agree that besides Pete Hoekstra and Thaddeus McCotter, that Mike Cox is about the only good thing we have going here, in Michigan?

[cripplecreek]

[Would you agree that besides Pete Hoekstra and Thaddeus McCotter, that Mike Cox is about the only good thing we have going here, in Michigan?]

we’ve got a few good guys in Michigan. I’m voting for Tim Walberg in my district.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Walberg

http://www.walbergforcongress.com/Home.aspx

[Buckeye Battle Cry]

Republican AG’s versus Democrat AG’s.