When I first heard that Attorneys General for numerous States were preparing to sue the federal government over the constitutionality of the newest health care bill - which, in my opinion, should be termed "health insurance reform" - I immediately began wondering if the Attorneys General had valid legal arguments. I had an inkling that they lacked a legal foundation, but as I'm not a Constitutional scholar, I wasn't quite sure of the possible legal dilemmas, if any. (Yes, I know I'm a lawyer, but I haven't particularly dabbled in the area of Constitutional law since I left the hallowed halls of my law school, or, at least, my barbri bar exam prep course years ago; wow, it's been that long. Sorry, I just had a self-awareness moment.)
In an effort to satiate my curiosity, I turned to the place any learned lawyer (or red-blooded American) would - the interwebs. I scoured the google sites only to find a lack of well-reasoned material on the subject (Yes, it is possible to "find" a lack of something). I searched and searched and searched only to find less-than-legal analyses of the bill. I was shocked. I thought there was an answer for everything on the internet.
That brings us to the present. I'm starting this blog (and hopefully regularly maintaining it) in order to answer political questions from a legal prospective. My first task is to address the legality of the health care bill a.k.a. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Step 1: Standing. (To be continued)
No comments:
Post a Comment