| Copyright: | (c) 2011 A.M. Best Company, Inc. |
| Source: | A.M. Best Company, Inc. |
| Wordcount: | 481 |
A federal judge partially denied the Obama administration's motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Mississippi Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant against the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate to carry health insurance.
The case may proceed on behalf of at least some of the 10 individuals who are co-plaintiffs, U.S. District Court Judge Keith Starrett ruled. The plaintiffs claim they are preparing for an impending financial injury from the mandate that will go into effect in January 2014. The plaintiffs alleged they are making financial decisions today "so that he will have the funds to pay for the penalties associated with his noncompliance and the associated legal costs of defending himself for noncompliance," according to a court petition.
Bryant, who filed the lawsuit as a private citizen, lacks standing to "show an imminent, concrete harm arising from the minimum essential coverage provision's effect on the health insurance plans offered by the state of Mississippi to its employees," Starrett said in upholding that portion of the U.S. Department of Justice motion to dismiss. Also, Bryant failed to show imminent harm to the state from the pending mandate.
Bryant's term as lieutenant governor expires at the end of this year. While he is the Republican candidate for governor, both that election and Bryant's employment status are still to be determined. "If Bryant is not a state employee when the essential minimum coverage provision becomes effective, then its alleged impact on Mississippi's employer-provided health insurance will not affect him," Starrett said.
"U.S. District Judge Keith Starrett's decision to hear my lawsuit on the merits gives me the opportunity to prove that the Obama administration's attempt to force all Americans to purchase health insurance violates our rights. I look forward to continuing this fight," Bryant said in a statement.
A divided 11th Circuit Court of Appeals found the health insurance mandate in the Affordable Care Act to be unconstitutional, but upheld the rest of the law. The ruling contradicts a June ruling by the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that upheld health reform law, including the mandate to obtain insurance coverage. That case has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court (Best's News Service, Aug. 12, 2011).
Still to come is a ruling by the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., which is to decide on a district court decision rejecting the mandate as unconstitutional but upholding the remainder of the Affordable Care Act. That challenge was based on a Virginia state law barring the government from requiring its citizens to purchase health insurance. The appellate court also heard the challenge of a ruling issued in a separate case brought by Liberty University, a private Christian university that claimed the law violates religious freedom and doesn't protect against the mandatory insurance payments being used to fund abortion coverage (Best News Service, June 6, 2011).
(By Sean P. Carr, Washington Bureau Manager: sean.carr@ambest.com)
Source: http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=275765&type=lifehealth
uca crush krav maga search brownie brownie jennifer grey
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.