Capital Health Regional Medical Center, et al. v. New Jersey, et al.

This case presents two important questions concerning protection of private property rights under the Fifth and Fourteen Amendments. These questions are:

1. Whether the New Jersey Supreme Court erroneously distinguished this Court’s precedents in Horne v. Dep’t of Agric., 576 U.S. 350 (2015) and Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 594 U.S. 139 (2021) thereby failing to find that a per se physical taking of private property occurred where Petitioner Hospitals are required by statute to provide access to their hospital facilities and healthcare services to patients who are unable to pay, are prohibited from billing those patients for services and treatments provided, but instead must rely on underfunded and unguaranteed subsidies?

2. Whether certiorari should be granted to clarify that Penn Central’s ad hoc standard should not be used to summarily condone government action where, as here, the New Jersey Supreme Court found, without any reference to the record, that Petitioners have no reasonable investment-backed expectations simply because they do business in a highly regulated industry and that the nature of the government action was to “adjust the benefits and burdens of economic life to promote the common good”?