Discussion: Court Blocks Effort By O'Care Enrollees To Defend Law In House GOP Lawsuit

What were the grounds for the courtā€™s action? Is there anyone else (a state attorney-general, an insurance company receiving payments, etc.) who could intervene?

At least we know - and GOP pols know - there will be one court looking over their shoulder to make sure the public doesnā€™t get the short end as the ACA is revisited. GOP thought they could just gut the Act without scrutiny; now, not so much!

Ms Sneed, Iā€™ve grown to really admire your reporting for TPM since signing on, but this post is insufficient. As is evident by Curmudgeon, there are many among us who want to know basic facts such as the basis for the decision and which court was involved. Some of us are even lawyers.

This is intended as entirely constructive.

1 Like

Here guys, this is the ruling from Judge ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, United States District Judge
;
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/HofR-challenge-to-ACA-DCt-5-12-16.pdf
Read away. I would love to hear a lawyers take.

Looked up Judge Collyerā€™s resume: ā€˜Wā€™ appointee, confirmed by GOP Congress, 2002. Appointed last year by another W appointee, Chief Roberts, to a 7yr-term on the FISA Court. So you know sheā€™s got the interests of Americaā€™s common man at heart /snark.

Justices installed by the GOP since about 1995 tend to be fully doctrinaire right-wingers, so her voteā€™s no surprise. (Robertsā€™ couple of veers to reality have made him persona non grata at many events, but the GOPā€™s corporate masters canā€™t remove him.)

Havenā€™t read the opinion, donā€™t know the vote or the other judges on the panel. Garland (appropriate ascendant to the Sup Ct if Dems had a spine) is the head of the DC District Court. So appellants might get a full panel (en banc?) hearing instead of settling for the 3-judge panel.

Weā€™ll see how this play.
Heil Trump.

In short, Congress refused to provide the funds to the insurance companies to cover their OCare risk, so Obama found the money another wayā€¦ which was indeed unconstitutional. And so the people trying to get standing would somehow appropriate moneyā€¦ how? Thatā€™s why they have no standing in this particular court case.

Honest to Godā€¦there IS no ā€˜we the peopleā€™ with these people is there? ā€˜Just elect us. We know best. EVEN if you think differently!ā€™

Not to be too picky but: a) Garland is the Chief Judge of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, not the District Court; and b) unfortunately, Garlandā€™s failure to advance to the Supremes had nothing to do with the Dems ā€“ the Repubs controlled the Senate and simply refused to even hold hearings on his nomination. If thereā€™s something you think the Dems could have done to show they ā€œhad a spineā€ Iā€™d like to know it.