More than a dozen state attorneys general have threatened to file suit against the bill’s constitutionality and in regard to its inclusion of the so-called “Cornhusker Kickback,” which would have the federal government bear the cost of all newly eligible Medicaid enrollees in Nebraska. Opponents of the provision argue that it was included only to secure the vote of Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson.
Additionally, at least 19 states have proposed legislation that would essentially nullify federal mandates requiring coverage. In Arizona, for example, legislators are scheduled to vote this fall on a bill that would allow employers and citizens to opt-out of any federal health insurance mandate. Similar bills are soon expected in Missouri and Florida, according to the report.
The Constitution’s supremacy clause places federal law above state law, making it difficult to actually enforce any state laws to nullify federal policy, said Mark Killenbeck, a law professor at the University of Arkansas, in the report.
However, proponents of state bills against reform efforts contend that U.S. Supreme Court decisions, such as the 2006 decision to uphold Oregon’s Death with Dignity law, suggest that state laws can trump federal policy in some cases, according to the report.
Read the Wall Street Journal’s report on state tactics to thwart healthcare reform
.
