On the third and final day of oral arguments before the Supreme Court, the central issue was whether the individual mandate portion of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Act”) was severable from the remainder of the Act. Counsel for the states’ argued that the individual mandate was essential to the implementation of the Act; if the mandate were vacated, the remaining legislation would produce a “hollow shell,” providing no funding for the healthcare overhaul. The government’s attorneys, in turn, argued that Congress’ intent was not to center the entire legislation around the individual mandate, and various elements of the Act were not dependent on the inclusion of the individual mandate. Support and opposition for severability fell squarely along ideological grounds, with senior liberal and conservative justices disagreeing over the practicality of dismantling the complex Act to determine which provisions could stand without the individual mandate.
The Court is expected to deliver its opinion in June.
Author(s): Brooke P. Dolara
