“Salvage” over “demolition”: Saving the ACA Post Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Zimmerman, Anne Houck

The death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg brings up uncertainty over many issues that depend on Supreme Court decisions. This paper explores the impact of the Court on the ACA and the ability of millions of Americans to access quality healthcare. Specifically, the issues before the Court concern the survival of the mandate in the absence of the tax penalty that was repealed in 2017, the ability of the ACA to survive without the mandate, and in the worst-case scenario, the limitation of the remedy to the states opposed to the ACA’s survival. This paper argues that judicial restraint and consistency, both conservative ideals, should save the ACA. Regardless of the toothless mandate, the ACA is operational and many aspects of it, including the Medicaid expansions, have little or nothing to do with the mandate.


  • thumnail for 7094-Article Text-12969-1-10-20200923.pdf 7094-Article Text-12969-1-10-20200923.pdf application/pdf 212 KB Download File

Also Published In

Voices in Bioethics

More About This Work

Academic Units
Published Here
January 28, 2021