Freedom Flix

IJ on the Individual Mandate



If government-mandated health insurance is upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) case is argued in March 2012, the Institute for Justice warns in its amicus brief that there will be dire and predictable threats to individual liberty and voluntary relations that have been the foundation of American contract law for centuries. Constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, who is the executive director of the Institute's Florida Chapter and who co-authored IJ's brief, said, "The individual mandate violates a cardinal rule of contract law—to be enforceable, all agreements must be voluntary. The Framers understood this, and would never have given the federal government the power to force individuals into lifelong contracts of insurance. The Court should not allow the government to exercise this unprecedented and dangerous power." As IJ's brief shows, the principle of mutual assent, under which both parties must consent for a contract to be valid, is a fundamental principle of contract law that was well understood during the Founding era and is still a cornerstone of contract law today. Indeed, contracts entered under duress have long been held to be invalid. Yet the mandate forces individuals to enter into contracts of insurance that would never be valid under this longstanding principle. (For a copy of IJ's brief, visit: www.ij.org/PPACAbrief.) If the U.S. Supreme Court fails to strike down the individual mandate, there will be nothing to stop Congress from forcing people into other contracts against their will—employment contracts or union membership, for example. If we still have a constitutional republic in which the federal government's powers are limited, then the Court should strike down this law. The Institute for Justice's brief is the only amicus brief filed with the Court that examines this case in the context of the history of contract law. The brief illustrates how the Supreme Court has recognized the principle of consent in commercial relations in its Commerce Clause and Tenth Amendment cases, and it explains why the U.S. Supreme Court has a key role in acting as a check against this unconstitutional power grab by the federal government.

Read more


Embed on your site:

Freedom Flix



Subscribe to our videos via iTunes or YouTube.

   IJ Launches the Center for Judicial Engagement (3:33)
The Institute for Justice launches the Center for Judicial Engagement
   More Lessons from Camp Politics (0:55)
   IJ on the Individual Mandate (2:25)
   IJ Fights to Unleash Free Speech (1:40)
Why Can't Chuck Get His Business Off the Ground?
   Kelo: Five Years Later (3:51)
   Where does the alphabet end? (0:32)
   Citizens United Debate Trailer (1:17)
   Hanging by a Thread: Defending Economic Liberty in Texas (2:29)
Eyebrow threading is a booming industry in Texas. But state bureaucrats are making it impossible to continue practicing this ancient art.
   Teaching is Not a Crime: Challenging Virginia's Unconstitutional Regulation of Yoga Teacher Training (3:05)
Anyone in Virginia can do yoga, and anyone can teach yoga. But, incredibly, it is illegal to teach people to teach yoga. Yoga-teacher training is just the latest target of vocational school licensing laws that require countless entrepreneurs to ask the go

Email Address
Please enter a valid email address

Institute for Justice
901 N. Glebe Road, Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22203
Tel 703.682.9320, Fax 703.682.9321
© 1997-2014