Forced Coverage

[somarco]

Hot Air's Ed Morrissey has a post on a fascinating and refreshingly unique theory espoused by the Institute for Justice.

According to its website, the IfJ is "our nation's only libertarian public interest law firm ... We seek a rule of law under which individuals can control their destinies as free and responsible members of society."

And they've filed an amicus brief in the aforementioned case, based on the age-old caveat that a contract entered into under duress is non-enforceable. Their stance is that, because insurance is, in fact, a contract, forcing one under penalty of law to sign on the dotted line renders it moot.

Florida International University Constitutional Law Professor Elizabeth Price Foley, who helped draft the brief, explains:

InsureBlog: Breaking a Self-Imposed Embargo

 

[Justin Bilyj]

Libertarians are the nervous passengers in a car going off the cliff driven by the Republicrats. They are the oath keepers, and are our sole link to a time when this country remembers what is to be responsible and free.
They will lead the charge in the second coming revolution...

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

I've stated this before but I feel it's worth repeating. This will be the first time in our nation's history that people will be required to purchase something or pay a tax/fine.

Worse, people will be required to purchase a product from a private company which directly helps the stockholders. Companies that are chosen to participate (states get to pick 'em) will have an unfair competitive advantage over other carriers.

No one has to buy auto insurance - don't drive a car
No one has to buy homeowners - rent
No one has to pay taxes - don't work
No one has to pay sales tax - don't buy anything or live in a state with no sales tax

If you can get a landowner to agree to live on their land and hunt, then you can live in a tent and not purchase a single product therefore never paying sales tax.

When 2014 hits it marks a time in our country where everyone by law must purchase a product or being in violation of the law. That person living in a tent on someone's land in a tent would be in violation of a federal law requiring them to have health insurance.

The argument that's been made is that no one can choose not to use the health care system because in the case of an emergency you'll receive care. There's a point there. If you're walking down the street and collapse (stroke, heart attack, etc..) you'll be taken to the nearest hospital and it's a federal law that you be treated to the point of being stabilized. You can't opt out of care if you're unconscious. If that's the case then go with national health care and get it over with.

 

[Justin Bilyj]

I for one live in Ohio, we campaigned and won a state constitutional amendment to not obey any mandate.

 

[b61mack]

Being right, is only good if anyone is listening. I think they will not listen. And will rule in favor of the bill on a technicality.

 

[VolAgent]

I for one live in Ohio, we campaigned and won a state constitutional amendment to not obey any mandate.

If only state law trumped federal law...

 

[GreenSky]

If only state law trumped federal law...

It's a shame that the Constitution didn't list those power given to the feds while stating that everything else we granted to the people or the states.

Very short-sighted founding fathers if you ask me. We should have kept King George.

Rick

 

[djs]

Maybe we should hold a constitutional convention to enumerate the powers given the federal government.

 

[somarco]

This bears repeating.

because insurance is, in fact, a contract, forcing one under penalty of law to sign on the dotted line renders it moot.

The amicus curiae brief addresses a principle indigenous to contract law that has been upheld for years. A contract signed under duress is invalid and unenforceable.

The mandate, if upheld, will have the effect of unraveling all contracts, not just health insurance.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

A few similar lawsuits were filed in MA when it was implemented in '06. I'm not sure they used this exact argument but 2 lawsuits were basically "you can't force me to do this." In all cases the courts rules "Yes...we can."