CHA seeks to join FL lawsuit … in support of Obamacare

Matt Bowman has already done a good job highlighting the key parts of the recent decision handed down in Florida declaring Obamacare’s individual mandate to be unconstitutional.

Allow me to add a footnote:

“… while the state of Florida is arguing against the individual mandate, the requirement that individuals who can afford it be required to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty, … six hospital organizations hope to argue in favor of it.

The amicus brief was filed by the American Hospital Association, the Federation of American Hospitals the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems, the National Association of Children’s Hospitals and Related Institutions (NACHRI), the Catholic Health Association of the United States, and the Association of American Medical Colleges.

Let me repeat one organization in that list:

“…the Catholic Health Association of the United States…”

So much for returning the pen, Sr. Keehan.



  • lisamom

    The only reason Catholic Health Association is joining the brief is money and government contract. They are looking at self preservation and so they will go against the teachings of the Catholic Church.

  • John V


    The article you linked to is dated November 17, 2010. It remains to be seen whether CHA will file or join an amicus brief in the appeal of Judge Vinson’s decision, and whether the arguments presented in such a brief would be contrary to any positions advocated by the USCCB or any individual bishops. But I don’t see how that two-and-a-half month old article implicates the recent exchange between Sr. Keehan and Archbishop Dolan.

  • Reneeca

    Just who consists of the Catholic Health Care Association? Do Bishops belong to this organization and have some say or if not who does. I don’t understand their position since this heal care bill is pro-abortion and may alow onje day that catholic Hospitals accept abortions! This is nuts!

  • Brian C

    Was the issue at hand in this decision solely the individual mandate, and not the entirety of the law (including the abortion funding)? If so, why would opposition to this decison (support of the individual mandate) in and of itself indicate opposition to the bishops? I believe the individual mandate was not one of the portions of the bill that the bishops opposed prior to its passage.

    • Katherine

      Exactly. This just shows CV’s real agenda is not protection of the unborn, but standing with the secular Right to keep 32 million Americans from getting health insurance.

  • Craig

    Obviously this is a travesty. What connection, if any, does the USCCB have with the CHA?



Receive our updates via email.