Supreme Court Ohio

Court tosses key parts of health-care reform bill

Washington (CNN) -- A federal appeals court has tossed out key provisions of the sweeping health care reform bill championed by President Obama, setting up a likely election-year showdown at the Supreme Court over the landmark legislation.

A 2-1 panel of the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta on Friday found that the law's "individual mandate" section -- requiring nearly all Americans to purchase health insurance by 2014 or face financial penalties -- was an improper exercise of federal authority.

"The individual mandate exceeds Congress's enumerated commerce power and is unconstitutional," Chief Judge Joel Dubina wrote. "This economic mandate represents a wholly novel and potentially unbounded assertion of congressional authority: the ability to compel Americans to purchase an expensive health insurance product they have elected not to buy, and to make them re-purchase that insurance product every month for their entire lives."

Significantly, the court concluded that even though that key section is unconstitutional, the entire law need not be set aside. In fact, the judges said law's expansion of the federal Medicaid program was constitutional, since states -- which administer it -- would not bear "the costs of the program's amplified enrollments."

This appeal resulted from in a massive lawsuit brought by Florida and 25 other states opposing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

This ruling conflicts with another federal appeals court in Cincinnati that found the "individual mandate" to be lawful. That sets up an almost certain oral argument and final ruling on the matter from the Supreme Court in coming months.

A federal appeals court in Richmond is also deciding the issue, and an opinion is expected there in the next few weeks.

More than two dozen other legal challenges to the law are floating in lower federal courts.

The health care reform act was passed by the Democratic Congress last year, with wide support from the president.

The 11th Circuit ruling came from Dubina, who was named to the bench by President George H.W. Bush. His daughter is a first-term GOP congresswoman from Alabama, Rep. Martha Dubina Roby.

He was backed by Judge Frank Hull, a Clinton appointee.

In dissent, Judge Stanley Marcus said Congress had authority to intervene.

"Congress rationally found that the individual mandate would address the powerful economic problems associated with cost shifting from the uninsured to the insured and to health care providers, and with the inability of millions of uninsured individuals to obtain health insurance," said Marcus, also a Clinton appointee. "Thus, to the extent the plaintiffs' individual liberty concerns are rooted in the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, they must fail.

Ohio Supreme Court: Healthcare signatures are valid « The Medina ...

COLUMBUS — Opponents of a federal health-care overhaul scored a key legal victory today that should clear a proposed ballot measure for a fall vote.

The chance for voters to reject portions of insurance changes championed by President Barack Obama will appear Nov. 8, alongside a ballot issue seeking to repeal a contentious re-write of Ohio’s collective bargaining law. One is expected to bring out Republican-leaning voters and the other is expected to bring out Democrats in a state closely divided along political lines.

In a unanimous decision today, the Ohio Supreme Court rejected a liberal policy group’s lawsuit challenging certification of the so-called Health Care Freedom Amendment on the grounds petitions carrying 69,000 signatures were flawed.

ProgressOhio executive director Brian Rothenberg argued that Secretary of State Jon Husted counted signatures on petitions that contained technical errors, including the way paid circulators listed their employment.

Husted, a Republican, argued the challenge revolved around petitions carrying extra information, a practice government should not discourage.

Justices said the secretary of state is “entitled to deference.”

They found that Rothenberg’s charges lacked legal merit, noting “even if his challenge had substantive validity, Rothenberg’s evidence is insufficient to establish that the part-petitions do not have enough signatures.”

Husted announced July 27 that the coalition of tea party organizations and other groups behind the measure that submitted 427,000 valid signatures, well over the roughly 385,000 needed to get the amendment on the Nov. 8 ballot.

The proposed amendment to Ohio’s Constitution would keep people from being required to buy health insurance or face penalties. The federal mandate would go into effect in 2014, when new competitive insurance exchanges are scheduled to open.

Opponents say the federal government is overreaching by requiring individuals to purchase a product. The Obama administration counters that Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce squares the constitutionality of the mandate.

Rothenberg said ProgressOhio was hindered from fully reviewing all the submitted petitions because 40 percent of Ohio counties refused to respond to a public records request in the time allotted for review.

Cincinnati Southern Railway, The Ferguson railway act : views of the press, address of committees, action of Board of Trade and Chamber of Commerce, record of the case, and opinion of Superior Court of Cincinnati and Supreme Court of Ohio thereon

North eastern reporter

Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of Ohio

Cases decided in the Supreme Court of Ohio in bank

Western reporter ..., All cases determined in the courts of last resort, as follows: Ohio, Supreme Court. Indiana, Supreme Court. Illinois, Supreme Court. Missouri, Sup. Ct. and Courts of Appeals. From September, 1885 [to October, 1888] ...