Health care law ruling splits Nevada officials

CARSON CITY -- State Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto said that a federal appeals court decision Friday throwing out a portion of the national health care law is only one court's opinion and that other courts have ruled the entire law is constitutional.

"The 11th Circuit decision today was 2-1 against health care," said Masto through a spokesman. "The 6th Circuit Court decision in late June was 2-1 for health care. All circuit courts are of equal dignity under the law. Today's decision only struck part of the law, the part requiring everyone to have insurance."

Masto has maintained the law is constitutional.

But Gov. Brian Sandoval and Mark Hutchison, the Las Vegas lawyer who is handling Nevada's case against the law, praised the decision.

All three agree nothing changes until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Critics have dubbed the law "Obamacare."

Hutchison, who is working for free, said a Supreme Court ruling could come next spring. He expects the high court this fall will hear a consolidated appeal of all lower court decisions involving the law and then make its decision in 2012.

They made comments after a 2-1 vote by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. Judges threw out the portion of the law that required individuals to buy insurance or face penalties.

Nevada is one of the 26 states that filed the lawsuit on which the court ruled.

In June, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in Cincinnati upheld the health care law in a separate case.

A third challenge is pending in the 4th Circuit in Richmond, Va., with a decision expected soon.

"It was a good court victory because the appeal courts upheld the core state argument that the individual mandate was unconstitutional," said Hutchison, noting that parts of the health care law already are being implemented in Nevada.

Sandoval, a former federal judge, issued a statement that the ruling confirms what he believed: "The federal health care law's individual mandate was over-reaching and unconstitutional." He predicted the Supreme Court will uphold the state's position.

Hutchison was retained last year by former Gov. Jim Gibbons to challenge the health care law after Masto refused his request to file a lawsuit.

Masto said at the time that she did not believe the law was unconstitutional and that Nevada did not need to challenge the law because more than a dozen states already had filed challenges.

She continues to hold that position.

So far, implementing the health care law has not cost the state anything, Department of Health and Human Services spokeswoman Mary Woods said.

The state is setting up a Silver State Insurance Exchange designed to help uninsured people find affordable insurance. But costs are being covered by a $1 million federal grant. The state also should learn Monday whether its request for a $4 million grant will be approved.

Gibbons could not be reached for comment Friday.

In challenging the law, Gibbons predicted the mandate requiring people to buy insurance would be found unconstitutional. He also said that if the health care law is implemented, then Nevada must find another $613 million to cover additional Medicaid costs it will incur between 2014 and 2019.

Medicaid is the state-federal program that provides health care to the poor, disabled, blind and some senior citizens.

Contact Capital Bureau Chief Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3901.