Ruling the 2010 Affordable Care Act, AKA Obamacare, unconstitutional Friday, Dec. 14, Fort Worth U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor reasoned because the individual mandate was eliminated in the GOP’s Dec. 22, 2017 tax reform bill. Without the individual mandate, O’Connor agreed with 20 states attorneys general that the ACA was no longer constitutional. Chief Justice John Roberts ruled July 28, 2012 [5-4], voting with the majority that the individual mandate was constitutional because it was a tax to pay for the health care legislation. Reasoning in reverse, O’Connor, second-guessed the Supreme Court’s ruling, assuming that the individual mandate was an essential part of the ACA. “It’s a great ruling for our country. We will be able to get great health care. We will sit down with Democrats if the Supreme Court upholds,” Trump told reporters yesterday.
Republicans have tried but failed to repeal Obamacare in Congress over 50 times, each time failing to get enough votes in the U.S. Senate. When the GOP thought they finally could end Obamacare, the late Sen. John McCain (R-Az.) voted Sept. 22, 2017 to save Obamacare, voting against his own party. McCain reasoned that some health care legislation, giving citizens with preexisting conditions, health insurance was better than no insurance. O’Connor’s decision will likely get reversed in the New Orleans-based conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, or if needed, in the Supreme Court. Even Trump’s two “conservative” Supreme Court picks, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, aren’t likely to vote to end Obamacare. More at stake than the Judge’s technicality is the health insurance of 11.8 million Americans receiving coverage under the 2010 Affordable Care Act.
Unlike political biases of state legislature or states attorneys general, the Supreme Court ruled Sept. 22, 2017 that the Affordable care act was constitutional, not only because of the individual mandate but because it provided health insurance to citizens without it. When Trump talks of working with Democrats, there’s certainly been over the last two years little common ground. Democrats, who become the majority in the House Jan. 1, 2019, have shown no willingness to negotiate an end of Obamacare. Supreme Court justices know that the legislation currently provides health coverage to over 11.8 million Americans. No one currently working in state health exchanges offering coverage under the ACA plans to do anything differently after O’Connor’s ruling. “We expect this ruling will be appealed to the Supreme Court,” CMA Administrator Seemam Verna tweeted yesterday.
O’Connor’s ruling adds fuel to Democrats’ arguments for taking over the House in the 2018 Midterm elections. Democrats ran on the health care issue in the Midterm elections that evidently got traction based on the outcome, picking up about 40 seats. Trump’s applause for the ruling panders to what’s left of the anti-Obamacare base but offers no concrete alternative, only more partisan wrangling. However the GOP thinks Trump’s Supreme Court picks impacts the vote, no majority is going to end the Affordable Care Act on a technicality. When you consider Reuters/Ipsos poll found that health care drove Democrats’ victory in the Midterm elections, you’d think the GOP would heed that advice. Voters don’t trust Republicans to fix health care, showing no sign over the last eight years to improve the ACA. O’Connor used circular reasoning to rule on Obamacare.
Because the GOP tax bill eliminated the ACA’s individual mandate, it doesn’t invalidate the entire legislation. Health care expert Timothy Jost thinks O’Connor pandered to conservative groups’ last gasp to end Obamacare. Calling his ruling “silly” and “irresponsible,” Jost thinks that even the conservative 5th Circuit Court would reverse his ruling, leaving the ACA intact. O’Connor’s ruling showed as much judicial activism, as anything from left-wing judges. Finding a technicality to invalidate Congressional legislation runs counter to judicial principles to rule narrowly, not to invalidate legislation. Invalidating Congressional legislation crosses the line in judicial activism, something opposed by Democrats and Republicans. “O’Connor is so far off the reservation here that virtually any [appeals] panel will reverse him,” Jost said, not concerned about the Fort Worth ruling.
Trump and his anti-Obamacare following needs to think how they can improve the legislation, not find conservative activist judges to overturn Congressional legislation. Republicans still feel slighted that former President Barack Obama railroaded the Affordable Care Act without one Republican vote in 2010. While that’s water under the bridge, Obamacare still provides health insurance to 11.8 million citizens, who otherwise wouldn’t get it at any price. Once the 5th Circuit strikes down O’Connor’s ruling, Trump should work with incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to improve Obamacare, improving its benefits and reducing its costs. Whether admitted to or not, Obamacare was urgently needed for millions of uninsured citizens, unable to get health insurance at any price because of preexisting medical problems.
