March 30, 2012 - In testimony given yesterday before the House Ways and Means Committee Subcommittee on Health, Dechert litigation partner Steven G. Bradbury focused on the economic realities behind the Affordable Care Act's individual insurance mandate, and he observed that Congress is "compelling the voluntarily uninsured to purchase insurance at disadvantageous prices as a quid pro quo to compensate for the enormous costs imposed by the law’s regulatory burdens."

"The economic data prove the point, and they belie any claim that the mandate is constitutional on the ground that it 'regulates economic conduct with a substantial effect on interstate commerce,'" Bradbury told the Committee.

Dechert recently filed three amicus briefs in the Supreme Court on behalf a large group of leading economists (including two Nobel laureates and numerous former senior government officials and research economists) in support of the States and private parties challenging the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. In striking down the individual mandate, the Eleventh Circuit had relied upon a similar Dechert brief filed on behalf of the same economists, and during oral argument at the Supreme Court this week, the Justices referred to all three of the Dechert amicus briefs in questioning the parties.

In addition to Bradbury, Steven A. Engel (counsel of record), Michael H. Park and Elisa T. Wiygul were on the briefs.