Page 1 of 65
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDAPENSACOLA DIVISION
STATE OF FLORIDA, by and throughBill McCollum, et al.;Plaintiffs,v.Case No.: 3:10-cv-91-RV/EMTUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al.,Defendants.____________________________________/
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now pending is the defendants’ motion to dismiss (doc. 55). This motionseeks dismissal of Counts One, Two, Three, and Six of the plaintiffs’ amendedcomplaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Fed. R.Civ. P.), and dismissal of all counts in the amended complaint for failure to state aclaim upon which relief can be granted (pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P.).The plaintiffs have filed a response in opposition, and the defendants have filed areply to that response. A hearing was held in this matter on September 14, 2010.
This litigation --- one of many filed throughout the country --- raises a facialConstitutional challenge to the federal healthcare reform law, Patient Protection andAffordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010), amended byHealth Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-152, 124Stat. 1029 (2010) (the “Act”). It has been filed by sixteen state Attorneys Generaland four state Governors (the “state plaintiffs”);
two private citizens, Mary Brown
The state plaintiffs represent: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida,Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, Northand South Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Washington.
Case 3:10-cv-00091-RV-EMT Document 79 Filed 10/14/10 Page 1 of 65