Skip to main content
Past Event

The Constitutionality of the Health Care Law’s Individual Mandate: An Oxford-Style Debate

Past Event

The Constitutionality of the Health Care Law's Individual Mandate: An Oxford-Style Debate

Walter Dellinger, Simon Lazarus, David B. Rivkin, Jr., and Ilya Somin

At the crux of the health care law enacted last year is the provision requiring individuals to purchase insurance, but opponents of the law wasted no time in filing law suits against it. Five district courts have ruled on the constitutionality of the individual mandate: three in favor and two against. With appellate court hearings already scheduled, these conflicting opinions appear to be on their way to the Supreme Court.

On March 2, Brookings Senior Fellow William Galston moderated an Oxford-style debate on the resolution, “the individual mandate is unconstitutional.” Arguing in favor of the resolution were David B. Rivkin, Jr. and Ilya Somin. Arguing against it were Walter Dellinger and Simon Lazarus. With the matter as yet unsettled in the courts, this debate puts forth the strongest arguments on both sides of the question.

This event is part of the Governing Ideas series intended to broaden the discussion of governance issues through forums on history, culture, legal norms and practices, values and religion.

After the program, panelists took audience questions.



Arguing in Favor


Ilya Somin

Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law

Arguing Against

More Information

(202) 797-6105

To subscribe or manage your subscriptions to our top event topic lists, please visit our event topics page.

Get a weekly events calendar from Brookings