Brief of Amici Curiae Health Law & Policy Scholars and Prescription Policy Choices in Support of Respondents on the Constitutional Validity of the Medicaid Expansion

Authors

Kevin Outterson, Boston University School of Law
Laura Hermer, University of Texas
Nicole Huberfeld, University of Kentucky
Elizabeth Weeks Leonard, University of Georgia School of Law
Sara Rosenbaum, George Washington University Law School
Sidney D. Watson, Saint Louis University School of Law

Document Type

Working Paper

Publication Date

5-22-2012

Keywords

Medicaid, Section 2001(a)(1)(C) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, health care coverage, South Dakota v. Dole (483 U.S. 203 (1987))

Abstract

The Medicaid expansion in Section 2001(a)(1)(C) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is one part of Congress’s comprehensive effort to expand access to health care coverage. This expansion is not revolutionary, but builds on many prior statutory amendments to Medicaid. Nor does it alter the voluntary nature of the Medicaid program – as before, States remain free to decline federal funding. The Petitioners and their amici have mischaracterized the expansion to obscure these facts, hoping this Court will unravel this hard-fought legislative enactment.

The question presented is whether Congress may offer States generous additional funding for Medicaid, with spending conditions that entirely satisfy the four-part test in South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987).

Comments

See below for second extended version of this paper.

Recommended Citation

Outterson, K., Hermer, L., Huberfeld, N., Weeks Leonard, E., Rosenbaum, S., & Watson, S.D. (2012). Brief of Amici Curiae Health Law & Policy Scholars and Prescription Policy Choices in Support of Respondents on the Constitutional Validity of the Medicaid Expansion.