The American Center for Law and Justice has filed a second brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, this time arguing against the individual mandate in the federal health reform law.

A Washington, D.C.-based advocacy organization says that the federal health reform should be declared unconstitutional because it is cannot function without the individual mandate, which the group also argues is unconstitutional.

Attorneys general from 11 states and Washington, D.C., have filed court papers in the federal health reform law case, arguing that the individual mandate forcing all Americans to buy health insurance, starting in 2014, is constitutional.

If you like political theater, chaos, confusion and upheaval, mark your calendars now for late June. In the most important courtroom in the nation, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling on whether President Barack Obama‘s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is constitutional in late June.

The U.S. Supreme Court did not address Virginia’s appeal of the federal health reform law during a scheduling conference Nov. 22.

The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the federal health reform law, focusing itself on the individual mandate, with an expected ruling by June 2012.

Another lower court appeal of the federal health reform law is headed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which begins its new term today (Oct. 3).

A federal judge in Harrisburg, Pa., found the individual mandate included in the federal health reform law unconstitutional, adding another chapter to the contradictory rulings of federal courts.

Nearly three-quarters (71%) of mid-sized to large companies intend to keep their health insurance plans in place for 2012, according to a new Towers Watson survey.

A federal appeals court in Atlanta contradicted another federal court, ruling that the controversial requirement that people either buy health insurance or face a fine, a key piece of the federal health reform law, is unconstitutional.