Today, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Republicans' Texas v. USA lawsuit to strike down the Affordable Care Act. They argued that since the U.S. Supreme Court had upheld the ACA in 2012 specifically because it was a valid exercise of Congress' taxing power, taking the tax away makes the entire rest of the law unconstitutional.
O'Connor, nominated by former Republican President George W Bush, said that because Obamacare called the mandate "essential", the entire law must be struck down.
"If the court rules that the ACA is more or less unconstitutional, then that means that the roughly 70,000 people who access insurance through the marketplace would be at jeopardy of losing that coverage", she says.
California and the 19 other states, as well as the District of Columbia, which won permission to defend the law when the Trump administration declined to do so, appealed to the federal court in New Orleans to reverse the Texas ruling.
"Every denied claim, every rejection from insurance - it made me believe I didn't deserve to be happy", Wall said.
If the lower court ruling is ultimately upheld, the case, Texas v.Читайте также: Snowball the cockatoo learned 14 dance moves himself, including hilarious Queen tribute
He noted the GOP-led Senate wasn't before the court, even as House Democrats dispatched a lawyer to argue in defense of the law. Legal scholars say procedural questions like that might determine the outcome of the case rather than the merits of each side's arguments.
Trump, who has vowed to protect coverage for preexisting conditions despite supporting the lawsuit to unwind the law, has sent mixed signals about when the party will come up with a new health care proposal.
An estimated 858,000 Pennsylvanians enrolled in federal health exchange plans could lose coverage, and so could another 89,000 young adults allowed to stay on their parents' health plans until age 26 under the ACA, data from the Urban Institute suggests. It was filed after Congress - which didn't repeal the law, despite pressure from President Donald Trump - reduced to zero the unpopular tax imposed on those without insurance.
The case could throw the country's health-care system into disarray and raise further questions about whether any law, not just the Affordable Care Act, can be sunk if just one provision must go. On appeal, the Justice Department changed course and decided the entire ACA should be invalidated.
If the ruling stands, 20 million people who gained coverage since the law's passage would be without coverage. That pool, an expensive option for sick patients that was phased out under Obamacare, only insured about 28,000 people at its peak, experts said - a tiny fraction of the Texans poised to lose coverage if Obamacare is struck down.
"Tomorrow, instead of defending the Affordable Care Act, the Trump administration will be arguing to overturn this law", Smith said. "This time, they're going at the law in its entirety". Pacific in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans. "The faces you see behind us are faces of Americans millions of Americans who will suffer if Republicans succeed in dismantling our healthcare law". Half of Democrats' campaign ads during the midterm elections focused its messaging on health care and the law.
Reestablishing the high-risk pool in the absence of Obamacare would be like applying "a tiny Band-Aid" to a gaping wound, said Stacey Pogue, a health policy expert with the left-leaning Center for Public Policy Priorities.При любом использовании материалов сайта и дочерних проектов, гиперссылка на обязательна.
«» 2007 - 2019 Copyright.
Автоматизированное извлечение информации сайта запрещено.
Код для вставки в блог