Federalism and state legislative opposition to the Affordable Care Act : the political value of legal strategy

• Main Author: Di Gioia, Ilaria
• Published: Birmingham City University 2018
• Online Access: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.753292

In the last six years, the American states have been the protagonists of a renewed push for sovereignty that has involved the enactment of different types of legislation to avoid the implementation of the federal health law within the state. George Mason University’s Professors Paul L. Posner and Timothy Conlan have identified the causes of state resistance in the ideological conflicts reflecting growing political polarization in Washington: “Federal programs have become a new battleground for states to demonstrate their fidelity to very different ideologies and political alliances.”1 The literature has upheld the legislative push against the reform as “capable of contributing under certain conditions to safeguarding federalism principles.”2 This research contributes to the literature on contemporary assertions of state sovereignty because it argues that the state legislative activity in opposition to federal law is a mechanism that cannot only safeguard federalism but can also enrich constitutional debate. This study combines an understanding of political science and legal method in an effort to provide a multi-disciplinary dimension to an understanding of the contemporary states’ rights phenomenon. 1 Paul L. Posner & Timothy J. Conlan, European-Style Federalism’s Lessons for America, GOVERNING (Nov. 12, 2014), http://www.governing.com/columns/smart-mgmt/col-europe-variable-speedfederalism-lessons-america.html. 2 John Dinan, Contemporary Assertions of State Sovereignty and the Safeguards of American Federalism, 74 ALB. L. REV. 1637 (2010-2011).