[ad_1]
Amy Goldstein
Journalist on Health Policy and Other Social Policy Issues
Texas Federal Judge Throws Knife in Law Affordable care Friday night, under a decision that the entire law on health care is unconstitutional due to a recent change in federal tax law.
The opinion of US District Judge Reed O. Connor overturned all national law that was expanding nationwide.
The ruling was made on the eve of the deadline by which Americans must register to benefit from coverage in the federal insurance purse created by law.
Since the complaint was filed in January, many health law experts have found that its logic was weak, but nevertheless considered the case the most important. An imminent legal threat to the 2010 law, which has since been a GOP watchdog and has been repeatedly challenged in court.
A spokeswoman for California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D), who heads a group of states opponents of the lawsuit, said the Democrat advocates of the law are ready to challenge the decision of the Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit of the United States.
The Supreme Court confirmed that the law was constitutional in 2012 and 2015, although the first of these opinions overruled the ACA provision that aimed to extend Medicaid to the entire country, leaving to each State the choice. Regardless of O Connor's decision, legal experts have predicted that the Texas case would be appealed and could well make sure that the law is again judged by the High Court, thus giving to his new conservative member, Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh,
O'Connor is a conservative judge of the US District Court North Texas. He was appointed by President George W. Bush. O & # 39; Connor has already ruled once on an issue raised by the ACA, issuing a national injunction two years ago on an Obama administration rule prohibiting health care providers from discriminating against the basis of gender identity.
unusual step to tell the court that she will not defend the ACA against this latest challenge. In general, the executive branch supports compliance with the laws in force in court cases.
The lawsuit was initiated by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who describes himself as a tea party curator, with support from 18 GOP counterparts and a governor. The plaintiffs argue that the entire ACA is invalid. Their arguments are related to the 2012 Supreme Court decision in which Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote by a majority that the penalty created by the law for Americans who do not have health insurance is constitutional, because Congress "has the power to impose a tax on people without health insurance.
As part of a tax overhaul a year ago, Congressional Republicans have imposed a change in which this ACA penalty will be abolished as of January. The lawsuit argues that with the application of the insurance obligation removed, there is more tax, the law is no longer constitutional.
"Once the heart of the ACA – the individual mandate – is declared unconstitutional, the rest of the ACA must also fall," said the prosecution.
In his opinion of 55 Pages, O & # 39; Connor writes that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, stating that it "can no longer be equitably interpreted as an exercise of the congressional fiscal power. "
The Judge also finds that this insurance requirement" is essential to the rest of the ACA and is inseparable from it. "
In a memorial of the court and a letter of support from congressional leaders, the Ministry of Justice did not go that far. . Justice officials said that once the sanction of the insurance mandate was removed next month, this decision would invalidate consumer protections at the ACA, such as its prohibition to charge more or refuse to cover insurance. people with pre-existing health problems. But the administration argued that many other parts of the law could be considered legally distinct and therefore continue.
Just before the deadline, three justice lawyers involved in the case withdrew from the case.
In the letter to Congress, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that justice took this position "with the approval of the President of the United States." President Trump has sworn since his law-breaking campaign, the nation's leading national achievement of his predecessor, and the administration itself has taken steps to create a cheaper alternative insurance because it circumvents the requirements of the law. # 39; ACA.
A lawsuit was lodged against the trial by a coalition of 17 Democratic Attorneys General headed by Becerra, a former Congressman from California. Democrats argue that, although Republican tax law eliminates the federal sanction for the uninsured, it does not override the constitutionality of the ACA.
"Today's erroneous decision will not discourage us. Our coalition will continue to fight in court for the health and well-being of all Americans, "said Becerra in a statement released Friday.
In the September pleadings, O & # 39; Connor posed more specific questions to the Democratic Attorneys General. than the Republicans.
Mid-term elections last month changed the political map in this case. In Wisconsin, a new Democratic Attorney General, Josh Kaul, has campaigned on pledging to remove the state's lawsuit, but the Wisconsin Republican legislature and outgoing Governor Scott Walker (R) , tried to block his ability to prevent doing that. In Maine, outgoing Governor Paul LePage (MD) joined the prosecution, but the Attorney General's office told the court last month that the governor did not have the power to do it himself.
Read more
New insurance guidelines would weaken the rules of the Affordable Care Act
Trump administration enacts rules allowing some employers to deny coverage for contraception
act alone to fill the gaps that Washington strikes in the Affordable Care Act
[ad_2]
Source link
