Nick Coons v. Jacob Lew
762 F.3d 891
| 9th Cir. | 2014Background
- Congress enacted the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, creating the individual mandate and IPAB; IPAB would issue budget-cut recommendations if Medicare spending growth exceeded projections; the Arizona Act amended the state constitution to prohibit penalties for not buying insurance; plaintiffs filed facial challenges in Arizona district court; the Supreme Court later upheld the individual mandate as a valid tax and struck down portions of Medicaid expansion in NFIB v. Sebelius; district court dismissed most claims, and plaintiffs appeal seeking reversal and declaratory relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| IPAB non-delegation ripeness | Novack contends IPAB violates non-delegation and is ripe. | Defendants argue IPAB passively awaits concrete triggers and is not ripe. | IPAB challenge is unripe; district court should dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. |
| Individual mandate and substantive due process—medical autonomy | Coons asserts mandate infringes medical autonomy rights. | Mandate does not force treatment choice and respects doctor-patient autonomy. | Mandate does not violate substantive due process as to medical autonomy. |
| Informational privacy and the mandate | Coons claims mandate burdens privacy rights by compelled disclosure to insurers. | Privacy concerns are speculative and await concrete dispute. | Claim unripe; district court properly declined to reach merits. |
| Preemption of Arizona Act by ACA | Arizona Act is not preempted and should be allowed to stand. | Arizona Act stands as an obstacle to federal objectives and is preempted. | ACA preempts Arizona Act under Supremacy Clause. |
Key Cases Cited
- National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012) (upheld the tax power of the individual mandate; struck Medicaid expansion portion)
- Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 133 S. Ct. 1138 (2013) (ripeness and injury-in-fact require certainly impending injury)
- Thomas v. Anchorage Equal Rights Comm’n, 220 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 2000) (ripeness and standing considerations in constitutional challenges)
- U.S. Citizens Ass’n v. Sebelius, 705 F.3d 588 (6th Cir. 2013) (standing based on being subject to jurisdiction of the challenged entity)
- Gade v. Nat’l Solid Wastes Mgmt. Ass’n, 505 U.S. 88 (1992) (preemption by implication standard under Supremacy Clause)