Obamacare Insurance Mandate Is Struck Down by Federal Appeals Court

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court on Wednesday struck down a linchpin of the Affordable Care Act, ruling that the requirement that people have health insurance was unconstitutional. But the appeals panel sent the case back to a federal district court in Texas to determine whether other provisions of the law could continue to exist without the mandate.

The 2-1 decision, by a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, left the fate of the nearly decade-old health law in limbo even as medical costs and insurance coverage have become central issues in the presidential race.

The ruling was issued almost exactly a year after Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court in Fort Worth struck down the entire law.

Two of the three judges, Jennifer Walker Elrod, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007, and Kurt Engelhardt, appointed by President Trump in 2018, wrote the ruling. The third, Carolyn Dineen King, appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, dissented.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/18/health/obamacare-unconstitutional-aca.html

---

Copy of the ruling (PDF) - https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/6610-obamacare-ruling/a6560c9831a0af845a00/optimized/full.pdf#page1

Original article -

WASHINGTON -- A federal appeals court on Wednesday struck down a linchpin of the Affordable Care Act, ruling that the requirement that people have health insurance was unconstitutional. But the appeals panel sent the case back to a federal district court in Texas to determine whether other provisions of the law could continue to exist without the mandate.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

CNN breaking -

Appeals court says Obamacare individual mandate unconstitutional and sends law back to lower court

By Dan Berman, Joan Biskupic, Tami Luhby and Ariane de Vogue, CNN

Updated 5:29 PM ET, Wed December 18, 2019
Trump admin changes course on Affordable Care Act


(CNN)A federal appeals court has found the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate unconstitutional, but did not invalidate the entire law, which remains in effect.

The decision by the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals likely pushes any Supreme Court action on Obamacare until after the 2020 election.

In the case brought by Texas and joined by the Trump administration, which argued the entire law should be thrown out, the panel has told a lower court that it must consider whether the individual mandate can be separated from the rest of the law.

This story is breaking and will be updated.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/18/politics/obamacare-appeal-ruling/index.html

[captdemo]

1. This is why we need Universal Health care

The ACA is probably doomed. I wish Biden would admit this and go with Medicare for All. I suspect he'll be the nominee and we really could use health care for all!

[zentrum]

3. THIS

[cstanleytech]

10. It might be better to let the Republicans dig their own graves by taking people's

health insurance before proposing such a thing.

[in2herbs]

14. I have been waiting for this decision, figuring rightly that it would essentially demolish the ACA

and along with it the political positions of D candidates who have said we need to build/improve the ACA.

I don't think centrism is going to get us health care.

[Liberalhammer]

2. Remember Republicans

Want you to die while making their insurance corporations rich.

[aggiesal]

17. That's what I'm telling my (R)'s acquaintances ...

People are going to die, because you keep voting for (R)'s.

That's all we have to say.
Nothing more, nothing less!

[BlueIdaho]

4. They are throwing us to the wolves!

I am so pissed.

[SWBTATTReg]

5. And 10 other courts have held these provisions valid. Cherry picking involved? Pick and choose...

which provisions to invalidate, leading to the possible invalidation of the whole thing. Despicable. Especially since it's been the law of the land for some time now.

[Ohiogal]

6. This ruling would be laughed at

In most other countries ...

Believe me, I just spent the better part of a year without having health insurance. Nobody needs that kind of fear and uncertainty. We need Universal Health Care NOW.

[Backseat Driver]

11. I believe you; been there; done that.

Less stress, but the terror is still there when one can't afford all those peripheral supplementals or Medicare deductibles. Thank goodness I've not any serious issues because the deductibles and 20% in Medicare isn't very doable either but would certainly make nasty collectors happy. The robo-calls and solicitations during Open Enrollment were relentless...Get ready, LOL!

[John Fante]

7. Healthcare was a real winner for the Pukes in the mid-terms.

Please proceed, dickheads.

[cstanleytech]

8. Auto insurance companies had better worry as

the unconstitutional mandate to carry it that many states have will be next on the chopping block.

[thesquanderer]

12. Auto insurance is very different.

The state says you must have insurance in order to get a driver's license. But you are always free to choose not to get insurance and not to get a driver's license. The mandate to get health insurance gives you no choice.

[Pantagruel]

16. Auto insurance should be different

It's possible not to get a license and not to drive but health emergencies happen to everyone. We mandate hospitals must accept everyone in the event of an accident , plague or illness. You can't choose not to be subject to health emergencies, in fact, "just let me die" is probably illegal .

[Polybius]

22. I agree with what you're saying, except there was technically a choice

They didn't force you to get it, you pay a fine if you don't. I did that for two years until I found free insurance.

[dware]

24. What states make it a requirement to get a license?

I know most states make it a requirement to get your vehicle registered, but I hadn't heard of not issuing a driver license unless you have insurance.

[thesquanderer]

29. Thank you, yes, it is the vehicle rather than the driver that must be insured. (nt)

[freepotter]

31. Disagree

Read your auto insurance policy. The Definitions clearly state that "You" are the insured, not your vehicle. The vehicle is listed so that proper rates can be determined for physical damage coverages and for liability rates. Your vehicle is listed so that you can't swap an expensive car for an old clunker and get physical damage coverage for a cheap rate, or drive a semi for Volkswagen rates. Your auto policy's liability coverage will cover you even if you are driving someone else's auto and are sued. (Former auto insurance underwriter.)

[thesquanderer]

32. But a person who has a driver's license can legally drive your car...

...even if that person does not have auto insurance. So the insurance is attached to the vehicle (and is the responsibility of the owner of that vehicle), rather than to the driver. That is, you as the owner of the vehicle must have insurance to legally put that car on the road, but someone is legally allowed to drive it even if that person, personally, has no auto insurance.

[rickford66]

25. The auto must be insured. Not the driver.

The driver may be listed on the policy as the main driver or occasional driver. On any of my policies, anyone with a valid license can drive my autos with my permission. They are not required to carry insurance on themselves to drive.

[thesquanderer]

30. TY, yes, it is the vehicle rather than the driver that must be insured.And people do have the choice

...as to whether they want to own a drivable vehicle or not.

[Backseat Driver]

9. Will there then be a tax adjustment if one paid a penalty for not having HC or ACA policies

since the mandate itself was unconstitutional, right...hahaha..., when we have some legislation regarding how we'll ALL get affordable HC before/on the cusp of Medicare? Not even going to consider Advantage plans with those peripheral coverages until things about this hot issue cool off and/or the rules stablize.

[ananda]

13. Just for the record, the Fifth Circuit ..

.. is THE worst court in the USA !!!

[catrose]

15. The first time my adult child had insurance was in 2014, when he bought his platinum ACA policy.

The first month he had it, he was diagnosed with cancer. We're currently waiting for lab results to see if he's in remission. And, I guess, to see if he'll still have insurance.

Thank you, gig economy. Thank you, Republicans. I will never forget.

[still_one]

18. Trump already did that a year ago. This was a repuke appeals court which ruled on this, and I

assume it will be appealed to the SC

Roberts will be the deciding vote I suspect

Gee, I guess those Jill Stein supporters who spewed the trash that there was no difference between repukes and Democrats were wrong.

They should hang their heads in shame

[captdemo]

19. I've yet to hear a Jill Stein supporter admit they were wrong!

I'll admit, I always thought that Hillary would make a great president. She certainly would have worked to make sure we had health care.

The Jill Stein supporters will never admit they were wrong.

[still_one]

20. From what I have seen, the vast majority of Stein voters would do the same thing again

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

21. Because fucking with the ACA worked out so well for the Repukes last election.

They need to be made extinct.

[Nitram]

23. IF THEY WANT SUGLE-PAYER INSTEAD, I'M ALL FOR IT. THANKS GOP FOR FORCING OUR HAND.

[mwooldri]

26. So if an incoming Democratic administration...

... changes the tax penalty for not having health insurance to a non zero amount, does it become constitutional again?

[pecosbob]

27. So the courts ruled against the provisions of the ACA

I recall that the ACA was first pitched by Republicans and the health-care industry as a stop-gap to prevent the adoption of univeral health care as proposed and supported by the Democratic Party since Truman's administration. So in my mind this puts the final nail in the coffin of the for-profit health care industry. The attempt to regulate the industry has been deemed unconstitutional. All that wish to maintain the structure of private health insurance are now on the wrong side of history.

If you still support for-profit health care and private health care insurance you are wrong.

[DeminPennswoods]

28. 10 years on, I don't this even matters any longer

to the ACA markets or insurers. The insurance companies have enough data to have figured out how to price their plans by now. Further, I'm not even sure how much the mandate has been or is being enforced.