The U.S. Supreme Court has released the highly anticipated decision regarding the issues raised by parties in two cases: Florida, et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius.

President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) into law in March 2010.  On March 26-28, 2012, the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the following four issues:

1)      Anti-Injunction Act: Whether the Anti-Injunction Act bars consideration of the ACA’s minimum coverage provision before the mandate’s penalties take effect in 2015

2)      Minimum Coverage Provision: If the ACA’s minimum coverage provision exceeds Congress’ powers under Article I of the U.S. Constitution

3)      Severability: If the minimum coverage provision is invalidated, whether the remainder of the ACA must also be invalidated or if it is severable from the rest of the law

4)      Medicaid Expansion: Whether Congress exceeded its powers and violated the principles of federalism by conditioning a state’s receipt of any federal Medicaid funding on implementation of the ACA’s Medicaid expansion

The Court held that the minimum coverage provision is constitutional, and survives as a tax. The Medicaid expansion is also constitutional, but Congress’ enforcement power to compel states to comply with the new expansion is limited. Medicaid participation by states is voluntary and always has been.  And under today’s ruling, states that choose not to comply with the new expansion can only be subject to forfeiting the new expansion money; the federal government may not penalize them further by withholding all federal dollars for their entire Medicaid program.

Please continue checking HealthReformGPS.org for additional detailed analyses of the decision by experts and other thought leaders.