Justices take health-care case

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court said Monday that it will hear a challenge to the health-care overhaul act passed in 2010, with a decision on President Barack Obama's most controversial domestic achievement likely to come in the summer of his re-election campaign.

The court said it will decide whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act exceeded Congress' power by requiring almost all Americans to have health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, a powerful constitutional question that likely will make it the court's most high-profile ruling since Bush v. Gore in 2000.

As a mark of the importance of the case, justices said they will hear 5 1/2 hours of oral arguments on the constitutional question and related issues. Oral arguments most likely will be held in March over one or two days, with a decision expected before the court recesses in late June. Normally, justices allow only one hour of argument, split between two sides.

Legal experts have offered a range of opinions about what the high court might do. Many prominent Supreme Court lawyers believe the law will be upheld by a lopsided vote, with Republican and Democratic appointees ruling in its favor. But others predict a close outcome, with Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Republican appointee who sometimes joins his four colleagues appointed by Democratic presidents, holding the deciding vote on the nine-member court.

Challengers went to court within minutes after Obama signed the bill in March 2010, and more than 25 lawsuits eventually were filed. On Monday, the court accepted the case brought by Florida and 25 other states, as well as the National Federation of Independent Businesses.

The White House welcomed the court's announcement.

"We know the Affordable Care Act is constitutional and are confident the Supreme Court will agree," White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer said in a statement.

Gov. Bob McDonnell said the court made the right move in agreeing to hear the challenges because continued uncertainty is causing problems.

"Nine months ago, Virginia requested that these suits be expedited for resolution by our nation's highest court. We are pleased that the Supreme Court has announced they will hear arguments from six of these cases during the current term," McDonnell said in a statement.

Virginia's appeal, which was turned down by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in September, has not yet been considered for a hearing before the high court. It likely will be taken up when the Supreme Court meets Nov. 22. U.S. officials have asked for Virginia's challenge to be set aside pending resolution of broader lawsuits.

Virginia had argued it had legal standing because the health-care law was in conflict with a pre-existing state law - the Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act - stating that residents of the commonwealth could not be required to maintain health insurance.

Accepting appeals from a decision by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta - the only appeals court to say the law was unconstitutional - justices said they would consider:

¤ Whether Congress was acting within its constitutional powers by requiring all Americans have at least a basic form of health insurance by 2014. Those who do not would be required to pay a penalty on their 2015 income tax returns.

¤ Whether other parts of the law can go forward if the so-called individual mandate is found unconstitutional. Lower courts have differed on the question, but the administration says the law's more popular features, such as prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, cannot work financially without the mandate that all join the system.

¤ Whether Congress is improperly coercing states to extend Medicaid, the subsidized health care for the poor and disabled, to those with incomes of 133 percent of the federal poverty level. Medicaid is a shared expense of the federal and state governments, and the federal government would pay 100 percent of the additional cost through 2016. The percentage would decline after that.

¤ Whether the issue is ripe for a decision. Some lower court judges have said the penalty for not having insurance is the same as a tax, and thus cannot be challenged until someone actually has to pay it in 2015.

It appears that all justices will take part in the decision.

Conservative groups had called on Justice Elena Kagan to recuse herself because she worked for the Obama administration as solicitor general. Liberal groups had said Justice Clarence Thomas faced a conflict because of the political activities of his wife. The court's practice is for justices who are staying out of a case to say so when it is accepted, and no one has announced a recusal.

Justices make their own decisions about whether they should recuse themselves.

Information from staff reports and The Associated Press was used in this report.