We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
While Congress' deliberations over policy dominate the news,
the Supreme Court often flies under the radar of the American
people, unless there is a major case before it. Many Americans are
not well-versed in the Supreme Court's dealings; in fact, a Pew Research Center political knowledge survey
found that in July 2010 only 28% of Americans polled could
correctly identify John Roberts as the Chief Justice of the Court.
As much of the health policy world's attention is focused on
the Supreme Court due to the Affordable Care Act case (Department of Health
and Human Services, et al. v. Florida, et al.), below is a
refresher on Supreme Court procedure and why there will be months
of silence from the Court between the oral arguments and the
announcement of the Court's decision.
First, a few Supreme Court basics. The Supreme Court's term
begins on the first Monday in October and lasts for a year. The
Court is typically in recess from late June or early July until the
end of the term in October. The current term began on Monday, October 3, 2011,
and will be wrapping up business for this term over the next two
months. The next term will begin on Monday, October 1,
2012.
Each week when the Court is in session, the Justices hold a
conference. Only the Justices are allowed in the room, and as a
testament to the collegiality of the Court, each conference begins
with each Justice shaking hands with every other Justice. During
conferences, the Justices review petitions for certiorari or, in
other words, decide which cases the Court will hear. The Justices
then review the cases heard previously that week. Each Justice,
beginning with the Chief Justice and going in order of seniority
(who has been on the court the longest), is given time to state his
or her views and raise any questions without interruption. Each
Justice, in seniority order, then casts a preliminary vote on the
case. In the case of the health reform arguments, which were heard
March 26-28, the Justices met in conference to discuss the case and
cast their votes on Friday, March 30.
So, if the votes have been cast and an outcome decided, why has
there been no announcement of a decision yet? What has been going
on since March 30?
After the votes are cast, the Court must then produce documents
that state the Court's reasoning for deciding a certain way. If
the Chief Justice is in the majority (generally an opinion five or
more Justices join), he or she assigns who will write the opinion.
If the Chief Justice dissents from the majority opinion, the
senior-most associate Justice in the majority assigns the opinion.
The Chief Justice or most senior Justice may choose to write the
opinion him or her self. Likewise, the most senior Justice in the
minority assigns who will write the dissenting opinion. Dissenting
opinions carry no legal weight or precedent, but might lay
groundwork for future cases. Additionally, any Justice may write a
concurring opinion, and anyone can write a separate dissenting
opinion should they agree with the ruling but for a different
rationale. In the case of a tie vote, which might happen if there
is a vacant seat or if a Justice recuses themselves from the case,
the decision of the lower court stands. In this situation, the case
is not considered to be binding precedent.
Once the opinions have been drafted, they are circulated to all
the other Justices for comments and recommended changes. If a
Justice in the majority agrees with the outcome expressed but
disagrees with the argument in the drafted opinion, they may write
their own concurring opinion or, at anytime before the Court's
opinion is handed down, they may switch their vote. In some
controversial cases, the outcome of the case has actually reversed
from what the original outcome would have been, due to Justices
flipping their vote. Then once the draft has been revised, the
opinion is signed by the author. Other Justices who are in
agreement then "sign on" to the opinion, and the verdict
is subsequently made public.
In regard to the timing of decision announcements, there are no
rules other than it must be released by the last day of term
(before the Court goes into recess in June or July). Unanimous or
less contentious decisions generally take less time than cases on
more controversial subjects. Given the weight and attention given
to the health reform cases, a decision is not expected until late
in the term, with most people predicting an announcement coming
June 21st, 25th or 28th.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Whether you are an employer that provides health insurance for your employees, a business in the growing healthcare industry, a hospital, or other medical provider—or you provide services to any of those entities—you need to know about changes to the privacy and security rules under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).
Understanding the complexities of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy and Security Rules is often a challenge for health care providers and consumers.
Marilyn Tavenner received bipartisan support from members of the Senate Committee on Finance in her confirmation hearing to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) though a full Senate vote is being held up, the president released his FY 2014 budget proposal with health care reform and specified reimbursement reductions to providers and manufacturers totaling $400 billion over 10 years sprinkled throughout it, and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sebelius
The Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services has recently issued an updated Special Advisory Bulletin on the Effect of Exclusion from Participation in Federal Health Care Programs.
On Tuesday, the North Carolina legislature has enacted into law, pending the governor's signature, a prohibition on the use of most favored nations clauses in contracts between commercial health insurers and providers.
