[ad_1]
WASHINGTON (AP) – The case pending before the Supreme Court on the fate of the affordable care law could give the Biden administration its first opportunity to chart a new course before the judges.
The case of health, argued a week after the November election, is one of many issues, along with immigration and a separate case over Medicaid work requirements, where the new administration could take a different stance than the Trump administration in the High Court.
If a change would be in line with President Joe Biden’s political preferences, it could cause consternation in court. Judges and former officials in the Democratic and Republican administrations regularly warn that new administrations should generally be reluctant to change their position in court.
Justice Elena Kagan, who as Solicitor General was President Barack Obama’s senior Supreme Court lawyer before appointing her to the court, said at a 2018 forum that the bar should be raised.
“I think changing jobs is a really big deal that people should hesitate over for a long time, which doesn’t mean it never happens,” Kagan said at the time. Indeed, Trump’s Justice Department changed four times during the administration’s first full term of high court.
Still, the health care record is a good candidate for when a rare change of post may be warranted, said Paul Clement, who was Solicitor General under President George W. Bush.
The Department of Justice defends federal laws in the Supreme Court “whenever a reasonable argument can be made,” Clement said in a Georgetown University online forum.
Trump administration called on judges to repeal all Obama-era law under which some 23 million people have health insurance and millions more with pre-existing health problems are protected against discrimination.
Biden was vice president when the law was enacted, calling it a “big (expletive) deal” the day Obama signed it in 2010.
As president, Biden has called for strengthening the law and he has already reopened registrations for people who could have lost their jobs and the health insurance that goes with them because of the coronavirus pandemic.
In the case of health care, the court could rule that the now insane requirement that people get insurance or pay a penalty is unconstitutional and leaves the rest of the law alone. This result, rather than abolishing the entire law, seemed likely based on questions and comments from judges in November.
The Justice Department could simply file a new legal file indicating that its views have changed, former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, also a veteran of the Obama administration, said at the same event in Georgetown. A second hearing is unlikely.
Clement agreed. “I think the judges would be happy,” he said. “I also think it’s an incredibly strong position.”
But Clement has warned that the new acting Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar will have to choose her places in front of the judges, three of whom have been appointed by President Donald Trump. “The Biden administration is going to have to realize that it is making a case in a reasonably conservative court,” he said.
Orders Biden issued in the first week of his presidency could also affect two cases slated for debate next month over the Trump administration’s controversial policies on immigrants.
In one case, Trump was not happy with the money allocated by Congress for the construction of a wall along the Mexican border. Trump has declared a national emergency and identified nearly $ 7 billion earmarked for other purposes to be used instead to build sections of the wall.
The case before the Supreme Court involves $ 2.5 billion in Defense Ministry funds. Lower courts have ruled that what Trump did is likely illegal, but the Supreme Court allowed work on the wall to continue as the case worked its way through the legal system.
Much of the money has already been spent and Biden canceled the emergency on day one in office. The Department of Justice could tell the court that it has nothing left to decide.
The same may be true of the legal challenge to Trump’s policy that made asylum seekers wait in Mexico. for US court hearings. Biden suspended the policy for newcomers.
“It looks like the matter might be moot, but we’re waiting to hear from the Acting Solicitor General what he wants to do. Obviously, this is a welcome change in policy, ”said Judy Rabinovitz, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, who challenges the policy.
A dispute over the waivers the Trump administration has given to states to impose work requirements on people who receive their healthcare under the Medicaid program could also be affected.
Biden on Thursday ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to review the waivers, but it is unclear how quickly the administration could move to overturn them and if any changes could derail the Supreme Court case.
The waivers were overturned by lower courts and states appealed. In early December, the judges knew that a new administration would be in place by the time they heard the case, but they decided to do so anyway.
[ad_2]
Source link