Final FReepathon of the Year!
Help Screw the Libs - Please Make Your Donation Here!
Posted on 10/22/2013 1:08:14 PM PDT by MeshugeMikey
A federal judge on Tuesday refused to dismiss a case that could fatally cripple the Obamacare health insurance law.
The Affordable Care Act forbids the federal government from enforcing the law in any state that opted out of setting up its own health care exchange, according to a group of small businesses whose lawsuit got a key hearing Monday in federal court.
The Obama administration, according to their lawsuit, has ignored that language in the law, enforcing all of its provisions even in states where the federal government is operating the insurance marketplaces on the error-plagued Healthcare.gov website.
Thirty-six states chose not to set up their exchanges, a move that effectively froze Washington, D.C. out of the authority to pay subsidies and other pot-sweeteners to convince citizens in those states to buy medical insurance. But the IRS overstepped its authority by paying subsidies in those states anyway, say the businesses and their lawyers.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Didn't you mean all 57 states?
Earlier:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3081909/posts
A federal judge will decide Tuesday on a case that could blow a major hole through the Obamacare exchanges when he rules on whether the government can dole out tax credits to Americans whose states declined to run their own Affordable Care Act insurance markets.
U.S. District Court Judge Paul L. Friedman heard oral arguments Monday and said he would rule Tuesday morning on the challenge by seven plaintiffs, who want an injunction from the rule that extends credits to all of the exchanges. He will also rule on the government’s attempt to kill the lawsuit.
The 2010 law says the tax credits go to help Americans enrolled in exchanges “established by the state.” But about three dozen states declined to create their own exchanges, leaving it to the federal government to step in — and opening up the question of whether residents in those states can still get the subsidies.
“They are asking you to interpret ‘north’ to mean ‘south,’” the plaintiffs’ attorney, Michael A. Carvin, told Judge Friedman.
Justice Department lawyer Joel L. McElvain argued that Congress did not want to favor some states over others through the health care law. Instead, he said the Department of Health and Human Services was poised to “stand in the shoes” of those states that decided to let the federal government run their insurance portals.
The case takes a nuanced look at legislative intent, but the stakes could not be broader for Mr. Obama’s signature domestic achievement.
Yanking away subsidies from about three dozen states that decided not to set up exchanges on their own would make joining the markets less attractive. Coming on the heels of serious glitches on the exchanges’ online portals, such a ruling would be another dent.
Attorneys from both sides—and even Judge Friedman himself—said the case is likely to climb the judicial ladder.......
The system connects to other federal computer networks, including ones at the Social Security Administration, IRS, Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management and the Peace Corps.”????
Im not surprised about the connections....but Im surprised anyone OUTED them.
the PEACE CORPS? that one is a bit odd,...
If the court throws 0bamacare out will the left agree and say the court settled it just move on like they were saying after the 1st decision....really? I just typed that...of course they won't.
tall tree
short rope
problems disappear.
I NOTE WITH LITTLE SURPRISE... that the woman who appeared from nowhere to aid the fainter....was nowhere to be seen in that photo...
Probably Americorps too and a ton of others I would imagine - the huge government web.
I've been arguing that point for awhile now here on FR!!!
The judge is a Clinton appointee.
Well, things at least equally Alice-in-Wonderland have happened at the USSC before. Basically it’s an “Oh, did you want to come at the issue THAT way? OK let’s see... OK we agree you’re right. Thump.” It happened with CFR. The way it would be most likely to happen here is to attack it as an unconstitutional tax. You called it a tax, now defend that tax.
My 86 year old mother-in-law lost her Medicare Advantage Blue Cross of NJ supplemental. Now we are scrambling to find another plan which actually has her doctor on it which is accepting new Medicare patients. Not an easy task. This sucks big time. Heads should roll.
It ain’t going anywhere, This is just another to divert attention and delay.
But, that’s just the start of the game.
Obama said that there are 57 states. Get with the program.
Yankees are Rebs?
Stars and Stripes = Stars and Bars?
Kool. Sounds like a celebration of (historical) diversity.
It is an unapportioned direct tax, a violation of the Constitution. The income tax is a direct tax, it required an Amendment to be legal.
These Obamacarecrats don’t care about all the confusion they’re causing Granny. Cynical, hardened lot. Heartless and headed for hell, figuratively if not literally also.
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.