最高法院第三次拯救ACA

{"title":"最高法院第三次拯救ACA","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/npc.30882","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The US Supreme Court, by decision dated June 17, ended the current litigation over the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by its ruling (7-2) that the plaintiffs lack Article III standing (<i>California et al. v. Texas et al</i>.). That is, the challenge based on elimination of the penalty underlying the individual insurance mandate failed because the plaintiffs were unable to show the requisite past or future injury fairly traceable to the defendants' conduct.</p>","PeriodicalId":100204,"journal":{"name":"Bruce R. Hopkins' Nonprofit Counsel","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/npc.30882","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supreme Court Rescues ACA for Third Time\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/npc.30882\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The US Supreme Court, by decision dated June 17, ended the current litigation over the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by its ruling (7-2) that the plaintiffs lack Article III standing (<i>California et al. v. Texas et al</i>.). That is, the challenge based on elimination of the penalty underlying the individual insurance mandate failed because the plaintiffs were unable to show the requisite past or future injury fairly traceable to the defendants' conduct.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bruce R. Hopkins' Nonprofit Counsel\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/npc.30882\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bruce R. Hopkins' Nonprofit Counsel\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/npc.30882\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bruce R. Hopkins' Nonprofit Counsel","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/npc.30882","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国最高法院在6月17日的裁决中,以7:2的裁决结束了目前关于《患者保护和平价医疗法案》是否符合宪法的诉讼,即原告不具备第三条的资格(加利福尼亚州等人诉德克萨斯州等人)。也就是说,基于取消个人保险授权的惩罚的挑战失败了,因为原告无法证明必要的过去或未来的伤害可以公平地追溯到被告的行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Supreme Court Rescues ACA for Third Time

The US Supreme Court, by decision dated June 17, ended the current litigation over the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by its ruling (7-2) that the plaintiffs lack Article III standing (California et al. v. Texas et al.). That is, the challenge based on elimination of the penalty underlying the individual insurance mandate failed because the plaintiffs were unable to show the requisite past or future injury fairly traceable to the defendants' conduct.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信