Baldwin v. Sebelius
District:
Southern District of California
Plaintiffs:
Steve Baldwin and Pacific Justice Institute
Defendants:
Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Hilda Solis, U.S. Department of Labor, Timothy Geithner, U.S. Department of Treasury, and Department of Employment Services
Case number:
3: 10-1033
Details:
Plaintiffs are challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on nine different counts. Firstly, they argue that the mandate on health insurance is outside of Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce as stated in the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8). They also contend that Plaintiff Baldwin’s right to privacy (as guaranteed by the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments) and his Physician-Patient Privilege will be violated by the Act, and that Congress does not have the power to impose a direct tax (Article I, Sections 2 and 9). Interestingly, this case points out that the PPACA is unconstitutional because its revenue-raising provisions originated in the Senate (Article I, Section 7). The Complaint explains that Congress has violated Article V of the Constitution by essentially expanding its enumerated powers through passage of the PPACA without the proper amendment process. Furthermore, the Plaintiffs state that the Act discriminates against men, and this violates their right to Equal Protection. Other counts against the Defendants are that the Act is unclear about the funding of abortions and that Defendant Sebelius has already not complied with a section of the Act.
Status: A Motion to Dismiss filed by the Defendants was granted by the Court on August 27, 2010. Plaintiffs have appealed the dismissal.
Share: