Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The IRS's Case In Halbig v. Sebelius Is Crumbling, With A Little Help From Its Friends
Forbes ^ | March 24, 2014 | Michael F. Cannon

Posted on 04/16/2014 9:40:39 PM PDT by grundle

Tomorrow morning, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear oral arguments in Halbig v. Sebelius, a case that challenges the IRS’s ability to implement ObamaCare’s health insurance subsidies and mandate penalties in the 34 states with federally established health “exchanges.” Though the IRS prevailed at the district-court level, its allies have been inadvertently undermining the agency’s case ever since.

First, a little background. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 clearly, repeatedly, and consistently says that the above-mentioned subsidies and penalties are authorized only “through an Exchange established by the State.” The IRS breezed right past that explicit, recurring, and uncontradicted indicator of congressional intent, however, when the agency announced it would implement those subsidies and penalties in states that did not establish an Exchange and the federal government established one by default. The IRS is thus taxing the Halbig plaintiffs, who reside in states that did not establish Exchanges, without congressional authorization. The plaintiffs don’t like that.

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: halbig; irs; lawsuit; obamacare; sebelius
The Obamacare law says that subsidies can go to people "through an Exchange established by the State." However, 34 states are getting their subsidies from the federal exchange, because they did not create their own exchange at the state level. The plaintiff in this case claims that the subsidies for the people in these 34 states are illegal. The law is very clear about this, but the IRS and the Obama administration don't care what the law says.
1 posted on 04/16/2014 9:40:39 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: grundle

I doubt the SCOTUS will agree with you, although I wish they would.


2 posted on 04/16/2014 9:51:37 PM PDT by Reagan‹berAlles (Remember, you can't spell "progressive" without "SS".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Just how many lawsuits are lodged against The Sebaceous Cyst? I doubt whether she will have enough free time in order to run for the senate.


3 posted on 04/16/2014 9:56:58 PM PDT by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

The Courts seem like a long shot. That ship has sailed, and it sank.


4 posted on 04/16/2014 10:13:22 PM PDT by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Does anyone actually think a majority of judges anywhere is going to decide against ACA?


5 posted on 04/16/2014 10:22:55 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The answer is simple , NO. The judges don’t want to audited by the I r s anymore than the rest of us.


6 posted on 04/16/2014 10:36:57 PM PDT by HANG THE EXPENSE (Life's tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reagan√úberAlles

roberts will just rewrite the law. again.


7 posted on 04/16/2014 10:47:37 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

There’s a limit to everything, and such a “rewriting” would amount to a complete disintegration, it seems to me. It amounts to dissolving parliament. Congress becomes a mere trumpet, a herald of royal intent.


8 posted on 04/17/2014 12:40:45 AM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew

a herald of royal intent.

You know Obama would like the sound of that...


9 posted on 04/17/2014 12:44:31 AM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew

AGREED.

This should kill it unless there are a bunch of limp wristed rinos who agree to a fix.


10 posted on 04/17/2014 6:28:13 AM PDT by proudpapa (Scott Walker - 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew

it was already rewritten on the “is it a tax or not” issue and it didn’t stop any of them, and it didn’t stop the obamacare law.


11 posted on 04/17/2014 9:21:53 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson