Abstract

The minimum coverage provision does not require individuals to purchase any unique product or service but rather requires a standardized financial contribution to the national healthcare infrastructure from all legal residents who are able to pay – a kind of requirement that has never been found unduly or even unusually restrictive of individual liberty. The question presented is whether the Eleventh Circuit erred in finding that the minimum coverage provision’s implications for individual liberty support a holding of constitutional invalidity under the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call