Supreme Court Tosses Lawsuit Challenging Obamacare
By Susannah Luthi, Josh Gerstein | 06/17/2021 Politico
The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a lawsuit threatening the entirety of the Affordable Care Act, finding that Republican-led states behind the case did not have legal ground to challenge the landmark health care law.
The 7-2 decision, which preserves health insurance for millions and the law’s popular protections for preexisting conditions, may serve as the final chapter in the decade-long legal assault on Obamacare, arriving as President Joe Biden seeks to build on the law鈥檚 coverage provisions. It’s also the final blow to former President Donald Trump’s pledge to rip up his predecessor’s signature health care law, after his administration had supported the red states who brought the lawsuit.
by Justice Stephen Breyer was joined by the court鈥檚 two other liberal justices and all but two conservatives, including Trump appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. By finding that the red states and individual plaintiffs couldn鈥檛 contest a change to the law, the conservative justices were essentially shielded from grappling with larger questions about whether Obamacare was no longer constitutional.
“[W]e conclude that the plaintiffs in this suit failed to show a concrete, particularized injury fairly traceable to the defendants鈥 conduct in enforcing the specific statutory provision they attack as unconstitutional,” Breyer wrote.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas agreed, adding: “Although this Court has erred twice before in cases involving the Affordable Care Act, it does not err today.”
The red states challenging the law, led by Texas, argued that Obamacare鈥檚 so-called individual mandate became unconstitutional after Congress zeroed out the law鈥檚 penalty for not having health insurance in a 2017 tax cut package. They said the entire law should fall because the mandate to purchase insurance, which remains on the books, was central to the law鈥檚 functioning.
However, the states failed to show how they were hurt by a mandate that had been rendered ineffective, the Supreme Court said.
The battle over the lawsuit dragged on for over three years, after many legal experts and politicians had originally dismissed it as a longshot. But it gained traction with Republican-appointed judges in lower courts and played a major part in shaping Trump鈥檚 presidency. Democrats attacked Trump and Republicans down the ballot for threatening health insurance to over 20 million people and popular insurance protections, putting Trump on the defensive over his failure to produce a long-promised health care plan.
The health care law has now survived all three of its major challenges before the Supreme Court since its enactment in 2010, and the newest ruling spares Congress from a challenging mission to shore up health coverage for millions during the coronavirus pandemic. Biden has pledged to expand upon Obamacare, though his most ambitious plans will face resistance from Republican lawmakers who still criticize the law 鈥 even if they鈥檙e no longer eager to highlight their opposition after their repeal effort backfired years ago.
The law appeared to be in greater peril this fall when Republicans quickly filled the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg鈥檚 seat with Barrett, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority on the bench. However, Barrett鈥檚 vote to dismiss the case didn鈥檛 come as a surprise after oral arguments, when she questioned whether the red states had a case.
The law’s defense was organized by a group of blue state officials, originally led by former California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who is now Biden’s health secretary. The Democratic-led House of Representatives also defended the law, and the Biden-led Department of Justice earlier this year reversed the government’s position by urging the Supreme Court to uphold Obamacare.
The justices debated the case in November, one week after a presidential election that was partly fought over Obamacare鈥檚 future. They spent the bulk of arguments, conducted over telephone because of the pandemic, homing in on the red states鈥 standing to bring the case, teeing up Thursday鈥檚 ruling that wiped away the lawsuit on a legal technicality.
But even if the court had agreed the red states could challenge Obamacare and that the individual mandate was now unconstitutional, the majority of justices during oral arguments appeared reluctant to strike down other parts of the law. Two conservatives, John Roberts and Kavanaugh, suggested that the mandate could be easily severed from the law without affecting its remaining provisions. Congress also appeared to agree when it axed just the mandate penalty, Roberts said.
鈥淚 think it’s hard for you to argue that Congress intended the entire act to fall if the mandate were struck down when the same Congress that lowered the penalty to zero did not even try to repeal the rest of the act,鈥 Roberts told a lawyer arguing the case for Texas. 鈥淚 think, frankly, that they wanted the court to do that. But that’s not our job.鈥
Ultimately, the justices punted on the key question of 鈥渟everability,鈥 or whether the entire law had to fall if one portion was deemed unconstitutional.
In a dissent, Justice Samuel Alito contended the argument that Obamacare must be considered as a whole essentially gives the states standing because other parts of the law clearly affect them.
“The ACA imposes many burdensome obligations on States in their capacity as employers, and the 18 States in question collectively have more than a million employees. Even $1 in harm is enough to support standing. Yet no State has standing?” Alito wrote in an opinion joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch.