A decision on a key requirement of the law that most people get health insurance or face a penalty, it seemed likely to go to Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, two conservatives who advocate beating Administration issues.
But Judge Roberts and Kennedy also looked at the two lawyers to act against the law in 2010, which is considered the implementation of the signature of President Barack Obama's domestic policy.
On Tuesday, the second of three consecutive days oral arguments, the judge drew unflattering questions about the limits of federal power, and if it can even extend to get people to eat broccoli and buy a gym membership or cars.
While conservative judges do not agree with its mandate, insurance, supported by liberal judges.
Counsel administration Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the judges that Congress, in adopting the law, was to try to solve the annoying problem of transition costs from people who have no insurance for those who buy the coverage, saying "the system does not work" and lawmakers were solutions "serious problem".
At stake is the power of Congress to intervene in one of the most difficult problems of American society - the soaring costs of health care and access to health care. The annual cost of U.S. health care totaled $ 2.6 trillion in the U.S. about 18% of annual GDP, or U.S. $ 8402 per person.
Judge Roberts, the leader of the Conservatives, but not in the top five most conservative of them, at one point said that "after the New Deal" policies of President Franklin Roosevelt in 1930, the court granted broad regulatory powers of Congress.
But he and Justice Kennedy seemed to ask: if Congress had gone too far here, exceeded its authority under the Constitution of the United States?
They made it clear that they meet the individual mandate, if they felt they did not give Congress broad new powers in people's lives.
Judge Kennedy, who is often critical in this area, expressed concern about the change in the relations between the state and governed it "a very fundamental."
"Do not you have a heavy burden of justification to show the resolution in accordance with the Constitution?" He asked Mr. Verrilli.
Two conservatives, Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito, have been vocal in their skepticism about the claim.
Justice Scalia, in particular, seemed concerned that Congress and the federal government would have unlimited powers, if the law was upheld. "What remains? If the government can not do what else can he do?"
The four liberal judges, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, all said they believe that a warrant valid under the Constitution of the United States.
The judges may decide on the case in June, when the court recesses for the summer tradition.
The court's decision to grant compulsory insurance, which comes into force in 2014, could decide the outcome of the consideration of health care, several of the firm to improve access to health care and expand insurance to more than 30 million people.
The decision comes a few months before Obama is seeking re-election Nov. 6.
The task of the law 26 of the 50 U.S. states and the trade group for small businesses. The law condemns conservatives who say it violates the freedom of the individual.
While activists on both sides expressed confidence that the win was not clear from the discussion of how the court can rule. If the five conservative judges are unified, the law will fall. Even if the conservative liberals joined by four, the law will be saved.
0 comments:
Post a Comment