Supreme Court once again to determine future of Obamacare
The case, a battle between two groups of states, will force the court to revisit the issue of the individual mandate, which was narrowly upheld by justices in 2012. If the mandate is struck down this time, the court will have to decide whether the entire law goes with it.
Led by
"Whatever the merits of the ACA's remaining major and minor provisions, they do not provide the near-universal healthcare coverage that the ACA's drafters attempted to create. ... They too must fall," the states argued in a written brief to the court.
A decision in the case is expected by next summer.
It is just the latest challenge to the health care law, approved in 2010, which has been a target of some states, conservative groups and religious organizations.
In its 2012 decision, the high court ruled that the individual mandate was constitutional under
The court has also reviewed several cases involving the contraception mandate, ruling in one brought by
Hunter told The
"We viewed it as more of a policy issue than anything else," Hunter said. "We try to stay out of policy unless it's public safety."
Individual mandate
The individual mandate to have health coverage was devised to ensure insurance pools were balanced with healthy and higher-risk participants. The Trump administration quit enforcing the tax penalty for not having coverage. Then, the Republican tax bill of 2017 eliminated the penalty, though the mandate remained in law.
A federal judge in
Striking down the rest of the law "would mark an unprecedented judicial incursion into the role of the political branches: invalidating hundreds of provisions that
"It would have devastating practical consequences as well, including by depriving tens of millions of Americans of health insurance in the middle of a global pandemic. Nothing in the law permits -- much less requires -- that result."
'Fate of the health care system'
Health care providers, hospitals and insurance companies are siding with
The
"The ACA is particularly vital now for the millions of Americans who have recently lost their jobs and employer-provided health insurance, ensuring that those newly unemployed and their families still have access to quality and affordable health insurance coverage during a global pandemic," the hospital groups stated.
Expanding Medicaid to cover more people -- and providing a larger federal share of the cost -- was part of the ACA, also known as Obamacare.
The ACA also included an overhaul of Indian health care. Several Oklahoma Indian tribes joined a brief arguing that the provisions have led to the modernization of the Indian health care system.
"Striking them down would be misguided and enormously disruptive -- especially now, as Indian Country and the rest of
The Trump administration and the
The administration is arguing that the "insurance reform" provisions that allegedly harmed the two individuals who are part of the case should be struck down but that the court should not address sections of the law that don't affect those two people. The "insurance reform" provisions include those requiring health care plans on the marketplace to provide coverage for a range of services.
The
"Instead, the Court can and should straightforwardly resolve the individual plaintiffs' claim that the mandate unconstitutionally requires them to purchase insurance and is inseverable from the ACA's insurance-reform provisions that prohibit them from obtaining the type of health insurance they would prefer at a cost they would prefer."
___
(c)2020 The Oklahoman
Visit The Oklahoman at www.newsok.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Lawyer eschews 'corporate mold'
Robert J. Mccarthy: Analysis: The GOP finds footholds in New York
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News