Current court challenge of health care law is the 'one to watch'

The health care reform law is back in the spotlight again as the federal government faced off against representatives of 26 states — including Utah — before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals panel in Atlanta Wednesday.

The 26-state challenge to the Affordable Care Act comes in the same week as the release of a McKinsey Quarterly study saying the law would cause 30 percent of employers to stop health coverage, and a Congressional witness questioning the authority of Health and Human Services in granting health care law waivers.

While the health care law has previously been challenged in court — three federal district judges have upheld the law and two have ruled it unconstitutional — the current case in Atlanta is seen as the most important challenge yet.

One reason for this, the L.A. Times states, is because the challenge involves all 26 state attorney generals jointly challenging the law. Additionally, the paper claims, the 11th Circuit is considered among the most conservative of the federal appellate courts and therefore more likely to rule against the law. If the law is struck down, the case is expected to move to the Supreme Court.

Time points out that Judge Stanley Marcus — who was appointed to the panel by Bill Clinton — was originally appointed to the district level by Ronald Reagan. Judge Frank Hull was appointed by Clinton, while the third judge, Joel Dubina, was appointed to the district court by Reagan and to the appellate court by George H.W. Bush.

So, does this mean the three-judge panel could rule either way? Time asks. Pretty much. It certainly means that the 11th Circuit ruling is the one to watch at this point.

In a breakdown of arguments made before the panel, Reuters reports that acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal defended the law using three main points:

The bill mandate requiring everyone to buy health insurance is an issue of interstate commerce, which Congress has the power to regulate.

Without the mandate, the governments ability to regulate the health insurance market would be undercut.

The act will reduce the federal deficit.

The mandate Katyal argued for requires almost all Americans 18 and older to obtain health insurance coverage, Bloomberg reports, and is considered the linchpin of the statute because it adds younger, healthier people to the pool of the insured population, making the program viable for insurers.