The Incidental Economist

Contemplating health care with a focus on research, an eye on reform.


  • About the blog
  • FAQ
  • Podcast archive
  • Site policies
  • TIE-U
  • Authors

    Austin Frakt Google+ twitter facebook email
    Aaron Carroll twitter facebook email
    Kevin Outterson twitter facebook email
    Harold Pollack twitter facebook email
    Bill Gardner Google+ twitterfacebook email
    Other Contributors
  • Recent posts

    • The medical device tax needs to stay
    • More comparative effectiveness goodness
    • Fluoridation
    • How to debate a wing nut
    • Chart of the day: Cognitive ability and enrollment into public programs
    • Cutting the budget for inspections of compounding pharmacies
    • Sound Medicine: Why are employers offering health care incentives?
    • “Body Ritual among the Nacirema”
    • A conversation with Keith Humphreys on health reform, mental health, and substance abuse treatment
    • Micro and macro totems
  • Archives

  • For speaking inquiries


    Interested in having Aaron or Austin speak to your group?

    For information on Aaron speaking, click here.

    For information on Austin speaking, click here.

  • Aaron’s stuff

    Selected appearances:
    The Colbert Report
    Good Morning America
    Sound Medicine (most recent)
    The Ed Show

  • Austin’s stuff

    Click here for a link to Austin's CV, as well as a complete list of his peer-reviewed publications with links to related posts and/or ungated versions (when available).

  • Standing & Ripeness

      1 comment
      May 17, 2011 at 11:21 am
      Kevin Outterson

    The legal doctrines of standing and ripeness are based on good conservative principles, designed to weed out theoretical suits and cases that are filed too early. As I’ve argued before, states don’t have standing to sue on the individual mandate. Nor does the Florida ruling apply to states outside of the 11th Circuit.

    So when TPM reported today that the 6th Circuit panel in the Thomas More case asked for briefing on standing and ripeness, I was not surprised, except to wonder why it took so long.

    Practical result if the government won on this issue in all Circuits? The individual mandate cases would be delayed until 2014.

    h/t to Don

     

    TwitterFacebookDiggDeliciousStumbleUponShare
      1 comment on this post
     
      Health Policy, Law
      Affordable Care Act, constitution, health reform, individual mandate, litigation, standing
    • Comments (1)

    • by pck on May 19th, 2011 at 08:02

      Volokh actually did a decent piece on this early this year (http://volokh.com/2010/04/02/standing-and-ripeness-issues-in-the-lawsuits-against-obamacare/)

      Interesting read if you want to get some basics before we check out the briefs.

      Reply

      [top]

    Write a comment

    Click here to cancel reply.




    (Submission implies acceptance of comments policy.)

    Loading

  • Follow the blog

    rss Google+ twitter facebook facebook

    Why all these options?

  • TIE Books

    Don't Cross Your Eyes! Amazon.com
    Barnes & Noble
    Books-A-Million
    Borders
    IndieBound


    Don't Swallow Your Gum!
    Borders
    Barnes & Noble
    IndieBound
    Amazon.com
    Books-A-Million
  • Tag cloud

    AcademyHealth accountable care organizations Affordable Care Act announcement antitrust blogging books comic competitive bidding costs cost shifting deficit employer-sponsored health insurance health care costs health insurance health insurance mandates health reform hospital readmissions hospitals instrumental variables insurance exchange market power Massachusetts Medicaid Medicare mortality obesity On The Record physicians politics PPACA premiums premium support prescription drugs prostate cancer quality reading list reflex RWJF single payer spending substance use tax uninsured xkcd
Work posted here under copyright © of the authors.

Details on the Site Policies page.