Last week, the Supreme Court denied another attempt to kill the Affordable Care Act by rejecting it 7-2. A group of red states and the Trump administration had claimed Congress’ removal of an individual penalty rendered the entire statute unconstitutional and thus led them to challenge its validity as law.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed shortly before joining two of President Donald Trump’s appointees – Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch – to uphold Obamacare.
Justices Sotomayor and Kagan
As oral arguments took place at the Supreme Court in this case, no one knew for certain what decision would be reached by a majority of justices. On Thursday’s verdict upholding Obamacare against challenges from Texas and other Republican states was an undoubtable victory for millions of Americans who depend on it as well as for its $3.6 trillion health care industry and policymakers throughout Washington.
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, which was short and technical. He asserted that Texas and two individuals who joined in its challenge did not have standing to sue due to not suffering “concrete, particularized injury” from federal law that allowed them to sue; Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh joined him in upholding it by voting 6-3; Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented in previous cases against its implementation; their proposed solutions would have dismantled its most popular provisions such as prohibition against discrimination due preexisting medical conditions among others.
Justices Roberts and Thomas
The Supreme Court’s three conservative justices voted to overturn Obamacare’s individual insurance mandate, which forms its core. Their reasoning was that commerce clause never should have extended so far as forcing people into purchasing products they did not desire.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts had previously upheld the law. To keep from making an unwise ruling in a mass health care case, he wanted to draw a boundary while persuading Kennedy that any unconstitutional provisions can be disassociated from other aspects of law.
Kennedy was unmoved. And as soon as the justices heard arguments from two individuals and 18 Republican-led states that challenged the mandate, it became apparent that most justices were prepared to reject claims by these plaintiffs that they had suffered sufficient injury for standing to bring suit against federal statute. They knew any ruling against this mandate would disrupt existing protections such as preexisting condition protections and subsidizing insurance premiums for millions of people – something ruling against it would certainly do.
Justices Alito and Gorsuch
The Supreme Court has upheld major provisions of Obamacare twice now, leaving this popular law which protects people with preexisting medical conditions and prohibits insurers from denying coverage to certain individuals in effect.
The Supreme Court disallowed a challenge brought forward by two Republican state officials and two individuals to challenge the individual mandate, on grounds that Congress’ 2017 removal of penalties for not having insurance rendered it unconstitutional.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh in upholding Chief Justice Amy Coney Barrett in rejecting this challenge to their appointment to office.
The majority stated that neither states nor individuals had standing to file suit, as they could not demonstrate they had suffered a concrete, particularized injury from the mandate and offered no evidence showing its costs on them; it declined to address whether severability from other parts of ACA was necessary.
Justice Barrett
Critics were alarmed when the Supreme Court agreed to hear an Obamacare challenge filed by Republican state officials and two individuals–led by Justice Amy Coney Barrett appointed by President Trump–which included claims that its repeal is unconstitutional due to Congress removing penalties for not having health insurance, making all or parts of Affordable Care Act unconstitutional. At her confirmation hearings last year, Barrett signaled skepticism of any argument made that Congress’ repeal rendered whole Affordable Care Act unconstitutional.
Democrats highlighted during her confirmation hearing, she voted against striking down the Affordable Care Act through a moot court case with similar arguments to Texas lawsuit. At her confirmation hearing, she stated her belief that it was unconstitutional to require people to purchase health insurance but other provisions of law were constitutional and that two previous cases established the severability doctrine could allow it to remain effective.
