tommyguns2
Senior Moderators
Staff Member
- Dec 25, 2010
- 6,311
- 4,997
The ACA is what the law says it is... that's the gist of the court's ruling today.
It will be extremely interesting to see how this plays out. The gov't has appealed to the full DC circuit (en banc). So this thing will likely go to the full circuit, and then to the Supremes.
I finally figured out how an individual had standing to sue on this. Apparently, the wording of the statute says that those for whom a subsidy is available, the mandate penalty exists. Since the statute only provides for federal subsidies for those exchanges established by a "state", the federal exchange does not have subsidies available to it. The IRS simply ruled that this is not the case, so if those states that use the federal exchange have subsidies, then the mandate also applies. Therefore someone in a state with a federal exchange that would otherwise not have been subjected to a penalty for not having health insurance, now is. Therefore he has sufferred an injury by being subjected to the penalty, and thus has standing...
This is a legitimate flaw of the ACA. The only way this thing survives is if the courts deliberately ignore the clear language of the statute. This will be a wild ride....
It will be extremely interesting to see how this plays out. The gov't has appealed to the full DC circuit (en banc). So this thing will likely go to the full circuit, and then to the Supremes.
I finally figured out how an individual had standing to sue on this. Apparently, the wording of the statute says that those for whom a subsidy is available, the mandate penalty exists. Since the statute only provides for federal subsidies for those exchanges established by a "state", the federal exchange does not have subsidies available to it. The IRS simply ruled that this is not the case, so if those states that use the federal exchange have subsidies, then the mandate also applies. Therefore someone in a state with a federal exchange that would otherwise not have been subjected to a penalty for not having health insurance, now is. Therefore he has sufferred an injury by being subjected to the penalty, and thus has standing...
This is a legitimate flaw of the ACA. The only way this thing survives is if the courts deliberately ignore the clear language of the statute. This will be a wild ride....