Posted on 12/15/2018 1:26:09 AM PST by conservative98
A spokesperson from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services told Fox News early Saturday that open enrollment for Affordable Care Act’s health insurance will continue despite the federal judge's ruling that the law is unconstitutional and must be "invalidated in whole.”
U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor, a federal judge in Texas appointed by President George W. Bush, ruled that last year's tax cut bill knocked the constitutional foundation from under Obamacare by eliminating a penalty for not having coverage. The rest of the law cannot be separated from that provision and is therefore invalid, he wrote.
The decision came on the evening before the Dec. 15 deadline for Americans.
The spokesperson from CMS told Fox that the judge’s decision, which was applauded by President Trump, is still working its way through the courts and is not the final word on the matter.
"There is no impact to current coverage or coverage in a 2019 plan," the spokesperson said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Who is appealing ?
The Trump DOJ ?
The Trump WH better follow the orders ..
Trump WH jumps and lets all these invaders in when a Left wing Judge barks ?
California, among other states.
It would be good to get the opinion and read it. Jence I am stepping out on a limb here.
Basically, Obozocare was upheld to force people to buy insurance because it was a tax. The tax was imposed through a tax penalty. Tax (penalty) went away. Hence... you cannot use the law to compel the purchase of insurance anymore.
He was warned by the America hating left.
He was warned to let every invader into the country .
He better obey this federal judge now !
Was Commiefornia a party in this suit?
No.
The decision will be stayed pending appeal.
We’ll see what happens.
yes
Yes, that makes Obozocare unsustainable, but how does it make it unconstitutional?
In absolute terms it doesn’t make any sense.
But Roberts, being more concerned with pleasing leftists than being a good supreme court justice, declared Obamacare to be a tax to save it. It is an utterly stupid argument made by a cowardly politician who never should have made it to the Supreme Court.
This message is paid for by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It was created and distributed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
...
Who heads up DHHS?
Get your butt out there and enforce the new ruling with PDJT’S backing
I’ll have to wait and read the opinion to find out specifically what the judge says.
If you remember what made Obozocare constitutional ... only constitutional basis for the federal government to mandate people buy insurance, according to C.J. Roberts and which the 4 leftists justices signed on to, is that it’s a tax — not a fine, penalty, or anything else. If there is no tax, it is therefore unconstitutional.
Your question seems to be technically based, i.e. if the law can’t function properly or be sustained at some an operational level, it doesn’t work and therefore a judge can decide it doesn’t work. A court isn’t really there to determine if a law is functional/operational, and if it isn’t, the court can fix the law, or declare it unworkable and stop the law. There has to be a constitutional basis for the law. If the constitutional basis is removed, then the law is unconstitutional (whether it is or is not operationally sustainable). If the law is constitutional, and not operating well or not at all, the legislature has to fix it, or the voters have to elect people who will fix it.
Let’s assume that the law is constitutional, but operationally unsustainable (i.e. it doesn’t work), the court won’t go in to try to fix it, or at least that is the theory. It can be argued that the Supreme Court fixed Obozocare twice, instead of letting COngress fix it.
Sometimes parts of a law are constitutional, and other parts of the law are not constitutional. Then the judge will see if the constitutional parts of the law can survive or operate as intended, or does the lack of the provision (now found unconstitutional) make the rest of the law unconstitutional - i.e. there is no basis upon which the federal government can enforce the law. MY guess without reading the opinion is that the mandate was the lynchpin of constitutionality, and without it, the law cannot be carried out constitutionally, starting with compelling people to buy insurance, compelling pre-existing conditions to be covered by insurance companies, compel federal underwriting standards, etc etc. Lazy Congress needs to fix the health care system that Obozocare really screwed up. My guess is that they won’t and hope that the Supreme Court saves them again. It is possible the Supreme Court will save them again and ignore the Constitution.
I don’t get it. Why does the government grind to halt when a liberal judge makes a ruling but life goes on when a non-liberal judge does the same thing.
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It was created and distributed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
…
Who heads up DHHS?
exactly
I’ve had enough of all of these wannabeeees trying to run the country...
...
I just posted a message to PDJT at contact the whitehouse asking why Alex Azar isn’t out there doing this with PDJT’s backing (his backing was his tweet)
bunch of treasonous bastards
When the law no longer works ... then we revert to ...WHAT ?
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.