Supreme Court Leaves Affordable Care Act Intact

MSN ^ | 17 June 2021 | Brent Kendall

[Erik Latranyi]

WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to the Affordable Care Act, the third time it has preserved the 2010 healthcare law.

Texas and other Republican-leaning states, backed by the Trump administration, sought to strike down the law on technical arguments after Congress reduced to zero the tax penalty for failing to carry health insurance. Thursday’s 7-2 decision, written by Justice Stephen Breyer, found that none of the plaintiffs suffered any injury from zeroing out the penalty and thus they lacked legal standing to bring the lawsuit at all.

“We do not reach these questions of the Act’s validity,” Justice Breyer wrote. “Texas and the other plaintiffs in this suit lack the standing necessary to raise them.”

Joining the majority were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

In dissent, Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, accused the majority of ducking the constitutional issues that conservatives for years have argued make the federal healthcare overhaul unconstitutional.

[Erik Latranyi]

Nobody has standing anymore on anything

[SoFloFreeper]

I wish they’d just whacked it, but I do respect Clarence Thomas...if he thinks this is the way to go, then I will defer.

I am encouraged this was not a ruling on the law as written—and I do believe we must continue to work to repeal this pile of Obamacare. The law is dung, and must be treated as dung—thrown out.

[Beagle8U]

Dig up McCain and kick his rino ass!

[Pollard]

Affordable Care Act

We haven't been able to afford health care since it became "Affordable".

[aquila48]

“Thursday’s 7-2 decision,”

Good thing we have a 6-3 majority at the Supremes.

[Trumplican]

“Nobody has standing anymore on anything”

We’re just the little people who need to sit down and shut up and take whatever rat poison they want to feed us.

[albie]

Of course! Because it’s sooo affordable! I only pay $1400 a month for catastrophic!! And have 0 health issues

[Alberta's Child]

Good perspective. One of the most fundamental principles of civil law is that you have no standing to pursue a legal challenge unless you can demonstrate that you were harmed in some way. You can’t file a lawsuit to challenge a hunting or fishing regulation, for example, if you don’t hunt or fish.

[Lurkinanloomin]

COWARDS!

[ConservativeMind]

Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell could have repealed the whole thing, but they didn’t want Trump to have a successful outcome.

[semimojo]

...I do respect Clarence Thomas...if he thinks this is the way to go, then I will defer.

JUSTICE THOMAS, concurring.

There is much to commend JUSTICE ALITO’s account of “our epic Affordable Care Act trilogy.” Post, at 1 (dissenting opinion). This Court has gone to great lengths to rescue the Act from its own text. Post, at 1–2. So have the Act’s defenders, who argued in first instance that the individual coverage mandate is the Act’s linchpin, yet now, in an about-face, contend that it is just a throwaway sentence.

But, whatever the Act’s dubious history in this Court, we must assess the current suit on its own terms. And, here, there is a fundamental problem with the arguments advanced by the plaintiffs in attacking the Act—they have not identified any unlawful action that has injured them. Ante, at 5, 11, 14–16. Today’s result is thus not the consequence of the Court once again rescuing the Act, but rather of us adjudicating the particular claims the plaintiffs chose to bring.

“

Kind of says it all.

[Lazamataz]

We haven't been able to afford health care since it became "Affordable".

If you think health care is expensive now, just wait 'til it's free." -- PJ O'Rourke

[wiseprince]

That.is.ridiculous.

What state?

[Lazamataz]

Yeah but this was a good decision. Not convenient for our side, but a decision rooted in law.

[joe fonebone]

And a special thank you to the bush league chamber of commerce worshipping republiCANT’S...
They had not one, but TWO chances to repeal this colossal pile of crap, in accordance with the wishes of their constituents, and...
Failed to do so..

They are all backstabbing traitors

[wiseprince]

Problem is, anyone with standing couldn’t afford a lawyer to take this all the way and it’s very reasonable to assume they wouldn’t have the time. The system is bogus

[Diogenesis]

Only Malta and Roberts’ satellites
and Obama’s and Comey’s guillotines have standing.

[cld51860]

Hey, the Brits dug up Oliver Cromwell and beheaded his corpse, so why not?

[semimojo]

Problem is, anyone with standing couldn’t afford a lawyer to take this all the way and it’s very reasonable to assume they wouldn’t have the time.

In a lot of cases I’d agree but I don’t think there was any lack of resources available to attack the ACA. I bet there were a dozen well funded conservative legal groups looking for a case to get behind.

[albie]

VA