Peter Kinder v. Timothy Geithner
695 F.3d 772
8th Cir.2012Background
- Seven plaintiffs, including Hill and Missouri Lt. Gov. Kinder, challenged provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
- The district court dismissed for lack of standing; Hill and Kinder appealed to the Eighth Circuit.
- Sebelius upheld the individual mandate as a constitutional exercise of Congress's taxing power.
- The amended complaint alleged injury-in-fact from the possibility of being forced to purchase non-preferred coverage; the district court found no injury due to eligibility for a catastrophic plan under § 1302(e).
- Hill would be under 30 at enactment and thus eligible for catastrophic plans; Kinder alleged injury only from performing state duties, not from coverage.
- The court held that neither Hill nor Kinder pleaded a sufficient injury-in-fact, so there was no Article III case or controversy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do Hill and Kinder have standing after Sebelius? | Hill and Kinder claim injury-in-fact from the ACA mandate and its effects. | Government argues lack of Article III injury; district court correctly dismissed. | No standing; lack of injury-in-fact. |
| Is Hill's injury-in-fact sufficiently alleged given catastrophic-plan eligibility? | Hill alleges denial of the option to purchase the catastrophic plan under the Act. | Hill will be under 30 and eligible for catastrophic plans, so no injury. | Insufficient injury-in-fact; standing lacking. |
| Did the district court properly restrict itself to the amended complaint on standing, excluding affidavits? | Affidavits should be considered to establish standing. | Standing must be assessed on the record at judgment from the amended complaint. | Affidavits not considered; record based on amended complaint. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (injury-in-fact requirement for standing)
- FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 493 U.S. 215 (1990) (standing record must show actual injury)
- Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009) (standing challenge must be proven at time of judgment)
- Osborn v. United States, 918 F.2d 724 (8th Cir. 1990) (facial attacks on jurisdiction referenced in ruling)
- Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (standing requires concrete, particularized injury)
- National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012) (individual mandate upheld as a tax under Congress's power)