On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear arguments in 2012 over, among other things, the "individual mandate" provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).Neil SiegelProfessor of law and political science, Duke Universityhttp://www.law.duke.edu/fac/siegel Siegel is an expert on constitutional law and theory who served as special counsel to former Sen. Joseph Biden during the confirmation hearings of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. During the October 2003 term, Siegel clerked for associate justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.Siegel has recently focused on constitutional issues relating to the ACA, writing four papers on the constitutionality of the ACA's individual mandate provision.Quote:"The Supreme Court today decided to determine whether the federal courts have jurisdiction to hear the present challenges to key provisions of the federal health care law, and, if so, whether those challenges have merit. Most people are understandably focused on the merits of the controversy, but the potential jurisdictional problem deserves serious consideration, particularly in Congress. "Congress has the power to pass a special-purpose statute providing that the federal courts can hear the present challenges. It should do so."
