Follow Nicole on Twitter during The Supreme Court Oral Arguments: @nic_fisher
Wednesday, the final day of oral arguments before the Supreme Court, turned out to be a very dramatic day… as far as oral arguments go. The same key players presented testimony and answered questions before the Justices on the topics of severability of the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion requirement in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
In the morning session, the High Court heard 90 minutes of arguments addressing whether the individual mandate could be severed from the rest of PPACA. The day started with former Solicitor General Paul Clement telling the Court that if the individual mandate is ruled unconstitutional, the rest of PPACA must also be stricken. Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler then attempted to convince the Court that PPACA was constitutional, but that portions of the bill could be removed. Lastly, Court appointed attorney Barto Farr also argued that the mandate is not severable. It became clear during the morning portion of arguments that the Justices were wrestling with whether it was appropriate for the judicial branch to strike down all of PPACA. It also became clearer which way several of the Justices were leaning, with several making statements indicating that they did or did not believe in severability.
During the afternoon portion of final day arguments, the Justices heard an hour of testimony (but added twenty extra minutes) on whether the federal government can force states to expand their Medicaid programs without being coerced, as the federal government will refrain from paying states their portion of Medicaid funding if the states do not expand. Once again, Mr. Clement, represented those challenging forced expansion, asserting that the Court should set limits for Congress’s use of spending power to coerce states into a particular action. President Obama’s Solicitor General Donald Verrillii returned for the Wednesday session to convince the Justices that Medicaid expansion was not forced upon the states through a withholding of money, but was simply an additional measure in PPACA to ensure health care coverage for millions of Americans. By the afternoon session, it was obvious that tension in the Court had risen. Not only were Justices more vocal, except for Thomas who is always quiet, but those arguing before the High Court were unmistakably more fired up.
Now that oral arguments have ended, the American public gets to wait. Although the Justices will make their decisions in the next 48 hours as to the constitutionality of various portions of PPACA, the results of their opinions will most likely not be known until June. Until that time, the Justices and their clerks will be writing what will surely be a difficult set of decisions that could forever alter the way Congressional power is used.
Wednesday’s Supreme Court Morning Transcript and Audio: http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=11-393
Wednesday’s Supreme Court Afternoon Transcript and Audio: http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=11-400
