Dec. 30, 2018
The federal judge in
Texas who ruled this month that
the entire Affordable Care Act was invalid issued a stay in the case on Sunday,
meaning that the law will remain in effect while the ruling is appealed.
The judge, Reed
O’Connor of the Federal District Court in Fort Worth, said that the ruling
should not go into immediate effect “because many everyday Americans would
otherwise face great uncertainty” during an appeal.
The ruling opened the
door for an appeal by California and 15 other statesthat
support the health care law.
Judge O’Connor’s
original ruling had caused some confusion because it came as many states were
finishing up open enrollment for 2019. Though he ruled that the law’s individual
mandate was unconstitutional and that the rest of the law was therefore
invalid, he did not issue an injunction stopping the law from being enforced.
The Affordable Care
Act includes not only health insurance exchanges and an expansion of Medicaid,
but also protections for people with pre-existing conditions, requirements for
what insurance must cover and other provisions.
In a lawsuit earlier
this year, a group of Republican governors and state attorneys general, led by
Texas, challenged the Affordable Care
Act, arguing that the requirement that people have health insurance
— known as the individual mandate — was unconstitutional.
The individual
mandate was enforced by a tax penalty on people who go without insurance.
The Supreme Court upheld the law in
2012 as an exercise of Congress’s taxing power. But as part of
the tax overhaul that President Trump signed last December, Congress reduced the penalty to zero
dollars, starting in 2019. Texas and the other plaintiffs contend
that the mandate will now lose its constitutional justification.
In a ruling on Dec.
14, Judge O’Connor agreed that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and
that other provisions of the law could not survive without it. On Sunday, he
affirmed that view and said that California and other states supporting the Affordable
Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, were “unlikely to succeed” in their
appeal.
The Trump
administration did not object to delaying enforcement of Judge O’Connor’s
earlier ruling. Immediate enforcement of the ruling could cause confusion and
“disruption to the health care markets,” the Justice Department told the court
on Dec. 21.
In a statement on
Sunday, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said that he would “march
forward” in his fight to keep health care affordable and accessible. “We’re
going to protect the health care of Americans and make clear that the A.C.A. is
the law of the land,” he said.
California plans to
file an appeal “imminently,” a spokeswoman for the state’s attorney general
said on Sunday.
Ken Paxton, the Texas
attorney general who initiated the lawsuit, said in a statement that he had “no
quarrel” with the court’s decision to issue a stay because it offers states “an
opportunity to develop plans to address the health care needs of their
residents for the day this ruling is ultimately upheld.”
“We are eager to
defend the district court’s ruling declaring Obamacare unconstitutional,” Mr.
Paxton said.
The case is likely to
be taken up by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New
Orleans — and many experts believe it will ultimately make its way to the
Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has
historically been reluctant to strike down
federal laws,
particularly those that have become ingrained in the lives of millions of
citizens.
Robert Pear contributed reporting.
Follow Sarah Mervosh on Twitter: @smervosh
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/30/us/politics/obamacare-appeal-judge.html?utm_campaign=AIS%20Health%20Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=68735754&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_knpbq5isQz3Fd2qsWpv5tN_mSwB7HbqexxSwNa9nsDRr6QlipJpsHiqYZB4ejyl9d7PRm1Ne5wxqhRlpYSELT3iYVsw&_hsmi=68735754
No comments:
Post a Comment