The main issue was the law's so-called individual mandate, the requirement that most Americans purchase health insurance by 2014 or face severe financial penalties. Lawyers for the states said forcing people to buy a product like health insurance is unconstitutional and unprecedented.
"If we uphold the individual mandate in this case, are there any limits on congressional power?" asked Judge Joel Dubina, who was named to the bench by President George H.W. Bush. His daughter is a first-term GOP congresswoman from Alabama, Rep. Martha Dubina Roby.
The two other judges who heard the nearly 2 1/2 hours of arguments -- Judges Frank Hull and Stanley Marcus -- were also concerned the law went too far in mandating that states expand various Medicare health coverage requirements. Both judges were appointed by President Bill Clinton.
The case, Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, was moved up from District Court after a judge in January declared key provisions of the health care law unconstitutional.
Initial arguments refocused attention on the issue of "coercion." Basically, the 26 states are arguing that the requirement that states expand Medicaid coverage amounts to compulsion and coercion of the states, in violation of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The judges also heard arguments on "severability" -- whether the determination that one provision of the law is unconstitutional invalidates the entire act. District Court Judge Robert Vinson, who heard the case in January, ruled that the unconstitutionality of one individual mandate voided the entire piece of legislation.
The appellate court heard arguments regarding the individual mandate as well, but focused much of their time and attention on the issue of coercion.
