Associated
Press June 27, 2019
NEW ORLEANS (AP) —
A federal appeals court on Wednesday requested written arguments on whether the
House of Representatives and numerous Democratic-leaning states can step in to
appeal a federal judge's ruling that struck down President Barack Obama's
health care law.
The question posed
to lawyers on both sides of the "Obamacare" legal battle is
significant because President Donald Trump's administration isn't defending the
Affordable Care Act. The filing at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New
Orleans also raises the question of whether there is a legitimate "live
case or controversy" to be decided, and what the "appropriate conclusion"
of the case should be if nobody involved can legally appeal the December ruling
by Texas-based U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor striking down the law.
Arguments are set
for July 9. The names of the three judges who will consider the case have not
been released.
O'Connor ruled that
the entire health care law was rendered unconstitutional by a 2017
congressional repeal of its unpopular tax penalties on people who remain
uninsured. Texas is leading about 20 Republican-led states that filed suit in
the case and that are arguing to uphold O'Connor's ruling. Two individual
people opposed to "Obamacare" also sued and are part of the case. On
the other side, California's attorney general is leading 20 states seeking to
overturn O'Connor's ruling.
O'Connor said that
without a tax penalty, the law's requirement that most Americans have insurance
is unconstitutional, and that the whole law falls as a result.
Whatever the result
at the 5th Circuit, the case is expected to wind up at the Supreme Court.
Matthew Brown, a
health care lawyer and adjunct professor of law at Tulane University, said ACA
supporters "are probably feeling some concern" at the appeals court's
questions. But, he added, that observers shouldn't read too much into the
filing. "It does not necessarily telegraph one way or the other which way
they're going to rule," Brown said.
Even if they decide
that the House and the states supporting the law cannot appeal, the 5th Circuit
judges would still have a question of the constitutionality of the law before
them, Brown said. "And if they don't decide, I think it's something the
United States Supreme Court might be interested in," he said.
The effects of
O'Connor's ruling have been on hold pending appeals. If the ruling is allowed
to stand in its entirety, more than 20 million Americans would be at risk of
losing their health insurance. And popular provisions of the law, including
mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions would go away.
In their appeal,
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, 20 other state attorneys general
and the House have argued that zeroing out the penalty does not make the
individual mandate unconstitutional; they note that the framework for the tax
remains in place. And even if the individual mandate were unconstitutional, the
rest of the law remains legally viable, they argued in briefs earlier this
year.
It's not the first
time the legal standing of those involved in the case has been an issue. The
health care law's supporters say neither the anti-ACA states nor the individual
opponents have standing to sue.
The ACA opponents
tried once before to block the House from taking part in the case. A single 5th
Circuit judge rejected their motion and allowed the House to intervene in a
February order.
No comments:
Post a Comment