Affordable Care Act Arguments: The Anti-Injunction Act

by Ice Miller LLP
Contact

The initial oral argument in the Supreme Court of the United States' (the Court) consideration of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the Act) deals with the federal Anti-Injunction Act (the AIA) and was held March 26, 2012. Generally speaking, the AIA requires that a person must first pay a federal tax and then sue for a refund rather than seeking an injunction against the federal government (the government) thereby preventing the collection of the tax in the first place.

The lower court history of the application of the AIA provides insight into the strategies of litigating major federal legislative efforts. The government first argued in the earliest case that the AIA barred a challenge to the Act. When the district court disagreed and the decision striking down the terms of the Act on the merits was appealed, the government failed to appeal or contest the AIA issue.

In other federal court challenges to the Act, different appellate courts focused on the AIA and held that it foreclosed the challengers from bringing suit and held the case barred as untimely. The Court chose to consider the issue and scheduled the first of the arguments before the Court on this issue alone. To that end, the Court appointed Robert A. Long, an experienced appellate attorney, to argue the applicability of the AIA to this litigation.

The legal arguments for all parties require a certain verbal and written agility and careful parsing of meaning and word choice. As Justice Alito asked the Solicitor General of the United States, Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., "General Verrilli, today you are arguing that the penalty is not a tax. Tomorrow you are going to be back and you will be arguing that the penalty is a tax. Has the Court ever held that something that is a tax for purposes of the taxing power under the Constitution is not a tax under the Anti-Injunction Act?" And as Mr. Verrilli responded to Justice Ginsburg that the Court need not decide the jurisdictional issue, Justice Kennedy asked, "Don't you want to know the answer?" In short, each of the parties in this argument faced challenges with which to deal.

Jurisdictional?

The government's position is that the AIA addresses whether or not a federal court may take a case (i.e., whether the court has jurisdiction as a preliminary matter) but that the AIA is not implicated in this case because the penalty established by the Act is not a tax for AIA purposes. The states and the private parties argue that the AIA is not a jurisdictional bar, but that even if it is, it is waived in this case.

Is the penalty under the Act a tax?

The government argues that the penalty payable for failure to buy health insurance is not a tax for AIA purposes (although for other purposes of the government's position, the penalty is a tax). See above. The states and the private parties argue that their challenge is to the requirement to buy the insurance and not to the payment of the penalty (or tax, or whatever it is labeled). As Mr. Long stated, "The Anti-Injunction Act uses the term 'tax;' it doesn't define it. Somewhat to my surprise, 'tax' is not defined anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code. In about the time that Congress passed the Anti-Injunction Act, tax had a very broad definition. It's broad enough to include this exaction, which is codified in the Internal Revenue Code. It's part of the taxpayer's annual income tax return. The amount of the liability and whether you owe the liability is based in part on your income. It's assessed and collected by the IRS."

Who is "any person?"

The government argues that the states (and clearly the private parties) are persons subject to the AIA. The states beg to differ and instead argue that they are not persons for this purpose and would be unable to seek relief if not permitted to proceed in this case.

Standing?

A footnote, perhaps, to this entire matter is who can bring a claim in federal court. At least one court questioned whether the states had standing (and so held they did not) to pursue the claims against the Act. At oral argument, Gregory G. Katsas, for the National Federation of Independent Business, strongly argued that both individual parties and the various states had standing to challenge the Act.

Conclusion (for now)

Ironically, the various parties (including the specially appointed lawyer arguing as a friend of the Court) argued on the merits of the application of the AIA to these cases. However, the government, the states and the private parties all agree on the outcome; the Court should consider the Act challenges and do so now and not later. It remains to be seen whether the Court agrees.

For answers to your health reform and other health care questions, please contact Greg Pemberton at (317) 236-2313 or gregory.pemberton@icemiller.com or any member of the Ice Miller Health Care Reform Group.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Ice Miller LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Ice Miller LLP
Contact
more
less

Ice Miller LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!