We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results:1-10 of 27

Supreme Court upholds the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate: what it means for employers and plan sponsors
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • June 28 2012

The Supreme Court of the United States (the "Court") ruled today, in a 5-to-4 landmark decision, that the individual mandate under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("the Act") is constitutional, although it also held that certain Medicaid expansion provisions are unconstitutional.


The constitutionality of the individual mandate under the Affordable Care Act an issue now ripe for Supreme Court review
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • November 7 2011

Section 1501 of the Affordable Care Act requires all individuals (with limited exception) to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the federal government, starting in 2014.


The constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate set to be scrutinized by four United States courts of appeals
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • June 7 2011

The stated purpose of the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (now called the Affordable Care Act (ACA)), according to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, is to put in place "comprehensive health insurance reforms that will hold insurance companies more accountable, lower health care costs, guarantee more health care choices, and enhance the quality of health care for all Americans.


Federal court in Florida finds the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act unconstitutional
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • February 2 2011

On January 31, 2011, Federal Court Judge Roger Vinson in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida declared the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Act”) to be unconstitutional.


U.S. district court in Massachusetts rules Federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 15 2010

On July 8, 2010, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued two decisions declaring Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) unconstitutional


Paul M. Hamburger
  • Proskauer Rose LLP

Andrew M Katzenstein
  • Proskauer Rose LLP

Stacy H Barrow
  • Proskauer Rose LLP

Albert W Gortz
  • Proskauer Rose LLP

Roberta K Chevlowe
  • Proskauer Rose LLP