STATE OF FLORIDA et al v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al

Filing 143

NOTICE of Supplemental Authority by KAJ AHLBURG, MARY BROWN, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ALASKA, STATE OF ARIZONA, STATE OF COLORADO, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF IDAHO, STATE OF INDIANA, STATE OF LOUISIANA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, STATE OF NEBRASKA, STATE OF NEVADA, STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF UTAH, STATE OF WASHINGTON (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Virginia Order Granting Summary Judgment) (WINSHIP, BLAINE)

Download PDF
STATE OF FLORIDA et al v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al Doc. 143 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Pensacola Division STATE OF FLORIDA, by and through Bill McCollum, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________________/ PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY On December 13, 2010, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued an opinion finding unconstitutional on its face the Individual Mandate provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("ACA"), ACA § 1501. Commonwealth of Virginia v. Sebelius, No. 10-CV-00188-HEH (E.D. Va. Dec. 13, 2010). The constitutionality of this same provision is at issue before this Court. A copy of the opinion is attached. Like the Plaintiffs here, Virginia asserted that Congress exceeded its Article I powers in enacting the ACA's Individual Mandate. The District Court accepted this claim, holding that Congress lacks constitutional authority to enact a mandate that broadly requires individuals to obtain healthcare insurance. Respectfully submitted, BILL MCCOLLUM ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FLORIDA /s/ Blaine H. Winship Blaine H. Winship (Fla. Bar No. 0356913) Special Counsel Case No.: 3:10-cv-91-RV/EMT Dockets.Justia.com Joseph W. Jacquot (Fla. Bar No. 189715) Deputy Attorney General Scott D. Makar (Fla. Bar No. 709697) Solicitor General Louis F. Hubener (Fla. Bar No. 0140084) Timothy D. Osterhaus (Fla. Bar No. 0133728) Deputy Solicitors General Office of the Attorney General of Florida The Capitol, Suite PL-01 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050 Telephone: (850) 414-3300 Facsimile: (850) 488-4872 Email: blaine.winship@myfloridalegal.com Attorneys for Plaintiff States David B. Rivkin (D.C. Bar No. 394446) Lee A. Casey (D.C. Bar No. 447443) Baker & Hostetler LLP 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Ste. 1100 Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 861-1731 Facsimile: (202) 861-1783 Attorneys for Plaintiff States, National Federation of Independent Business, Mary Brown, and Kaj Ahlburg Katherine J. Spohn Special Counsel to the Attorney General Office of the Attorney General of Nebraska 2115 State Capitol Building Lincoln, Nebraska 68508 Telephone: (402) 471-2834 Facsimile: (402) 471-1929 Email: katie.spohn@nebraska.gov Attorneys for Plaintiff the State of Nebraska Karen R. Harned Executive Director National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center 1201 F Street, N.W., Suite 200 Washington, DC 20004 Telephone: (202) 314-2061 Facsimile: (202) 554-5572 Bill Cobb Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation Office of the Attorney General of Texas P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 Telephone: (512) 475-0131 Facsimile: (512) 936-0545 Email: bill.cobb@oag.state.tx.us 2 Of counsel for Plaintiff National Federation of Independent Business Attorneys for Plaintiff the State of Texas CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 14th day of December, 2010, a copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Notice of Supplemental Authority was served on counsel of record for all Defendants through the Court's Notice of Electronic Filing system. /s/ Blaine H. Winship Blaine H. Winship Special Counsel 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?