OK Judge Rules Against Obamacare Tax Subsidies

[Webster]

...the more I read this, the more I think this is headed to the High Court eventually...

A federal judge in Oklahoma has ruled that Obamacare subsidies cannot go to residents of states that are not running their own insurance exchanges, a second blow to the Obama administration on a issue that threatens a key element of the health law’s coverage expansion.

Judge Ronald A. White said that the administration’s decision to allow subsidies to go through either a state-run health insurance exchange or the federal exchange is an improper and invalid reading of the Affordable Care Act and must be struck.

White’s ruling marks the second judgment against the government on the subsidy question and comes as the Supreme Court could decide whether to weigh in. “The court holds that the IRS rule is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law,” White wrote in his ruling. The IRS had allowed people to get subsidies in all states.

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, who brought the lawsuit, welcomed the decision. “Today’s ruling is a consequential victory for the rule of law,” he said in a statement. “The administration and its bureaucrats in the IRS handed out billions in illegal tax credits and subsidies and vastly expanded the reach of the health care law because they didn’t like the way Congress wrote the Affordable Care Act. That’s not how our system of government works.”

Split decisions in U.S. appeals courts came earlier this year. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., ruled with the Obama administration, saying the IRS had the right to allow the subsidies to go to residents of any state. The D.C. Court of Appeals ruled against that regulation but it recently vacated that decision when it decided to have the full court, not just a three judge panel, rehear the case.

The losing party in the 4th Circuit has already asked the Supreme Court to take the case. The Obama administration has until Friday to reply.

White wrote that he knows the case will be closely scrutinized. And he dismissed criticism that court rulings against the subsidies are politically motivated. “Such a case (even if affirmed on the inevitable appeal), does not ‘gut’ or ‘destroy’ anything,” White wrote. “On the contrary, the court is upholding the act as written. Congress is free to amend the ACA to provide for tax credits in both state and federal exchanges, if that is the legislative will.”

Opponents of the subsidies already say that White’s ruling should nudge the court to review the issue. The Obama administration is expected to appeal this ruling to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The decision improve the “odds for SCOTUS taking appeal this fall despite [the] D.C. Circuit’s pending en banc hearing in December,” said Tom Miller, a health care policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute who has been following the legal fight.

But others downplayed the significance of the ruling. “This is only a district court decision and the court stayed its effect until the government has a chance to appeal to the 10th Circuit,” said Timothy Jost, a Washington and Lee law professor. “I would expect the Supreme Court to await a circuit split, and currently there is none with the Halbig judgment vacated” pending the en banc hearing.

The challengers say that the law only allows subsidies to go to residents of states with state-run exchanges but the White House and congressional Democrats say the law was written to allow anyone to get subsidies — and that any language in the law that contradicts that was written in error.(Politico)

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

This 2nd ruling is good news. Any language in the law that contradicts that was written in error. LOL! Even though its on several different areas of obama care its just a mistake. No, what the mistake is from these scummy people is they thought all the states would just fall in line for a unconstitutional law and not fight back and continue to fight back.

 

[Webster]

This 2nd ruling is good news. Any language in the law that contradicts that was written in error. LOL! Even though its on several different areas of obama care its just a mistake. No, what the mistake is from these scummy people is they thought all the states would just fall in line for a unconstitutional law and not fight back and continue to fight back.

I don't know if I'd be opening the champagne up quite yet...if this decision gets turned back by the 10th Circuit, you're back to square 1. Even if the circuit affirms the decision, you'd still have to hope that the High Court takes the case up (and even if they do, their 2012 decision affirming the ACA would be their likely guide this go-round). That said, as much of the ACA as has been implemented thus far, to turn back now would create a holy nightmare of challenges...

On the other hand - and I say this as a supporter of the ACA, though to be quite honest, I support single-payer and not the current monstrosity that is the ACA - this is one time where I wish Congress had written that language in clearer terms, namely something along the lines of "the subsidies apply to both state & federal exchanges".

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

This 2nd ruling is good news. Any language in the law that contradicts that was written in error. LOL! Even though its on several different areas of obama care its just a mistake. No, what the mistake is from these scummy people is they thought all the states would just fall in line for a unconstitutional law and not fight back and continue to fight back.

I don't know if I'd be opening the champagne up quite yet...if this decision gets turned back by the 10th Circuit, you're back to square 1. Even if the circuit affirms the decision, you'd still have to hope that the High Court takes the case up (and even if they do, their 2012 decision affirming the ACA would be their likely guide this go-round). That said, as much of the ACA as has been implemented thus far, to turn back now would create a holy nightmare of challenges...

On the other hand - and I say this as a supporter of the ACA, though to be quite honest, I support single-payer and not the current monstrosity that is the ACA - this is one time where I wish Congress had written that language in clearer terms, namely something along the lines of "the subsidies apply to both state & federal exchanges".

Thats fine let it go to the supreme court. The writing is dead clear. And our dear leader can only threaten supreme court justices in secret to change there decisions at the last moment so many times.

No it would not create a holy nightmare. It would create a boom of full time jobs coming back and bring back people being able to choose the insurance they want. Plus with these latest court rulings in the supreme court its already falling apart.

 

[Webster]

Thats fine let it go to the supreme court. The writing is dead clear. And our dear leader can only threaten supreme court justices in secret to change there decisions at the last moment so many times.

No it would not create a holy nightmare. It would create a boom of full time jobs coming back and bring back people being able to choose the insurance they want. Plus with these latest court rulings in the supreme court its already falling apart.

Like I said earlier, I wouldn't start celebrating...and yes, it would create a nightmare: people having to worry about being denied coverage over pre-existing conditions, insurance companies raising rates whenever they wanted to w/out concern for actually providing health insurance, people having to remain at jobs they may not want to stay at over fears of losing insurance...so yes, it would create a nightmare for millions of Americans.

Besides, its' times like these I think of Andrew Jackson's apocryphal words when faced with a similar Court ruling that went against him: John Marshall has made his decision...now let him enforce it!

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Thats fine let it go to the supreme court. The writing is dead clear. And our dear leader can only threaten supreme court justices in secret to change there decisions at the last moment so many times.

No it would not create a holy nightmare. It would create a boom of full time jobs coming back and bring back people being able to choose the insurance they want. Plus with these latest court rulings in the supreme court its already falling apart.

Like I said earlier, I wouldn't start celebrating...and yes, it would create a nightmare: people having to worry about being denied coverage over pre-existing conditions, insurance companies raising rates whenever they wanted to w/out concern for actually providing health insurance, people having to remain at jobs they may not want to stay at over fears of losing insurance...so yes, it would create a nightmare for millions of Americans.

Besides, its' times like these I think of Andrew Jackson's apocryphal words when faced with a similar Court ruling that went against him: John Marshall has made his decision...now let him enforce it!

I would start celebrating. A chance for more returned freedom.

No it would be a positive for millions who want the insurance they want. And actually not be worried about being forced to part time employment. And government with Medicare and Medicaid deny claims more then all the insurance companies combined. And now it's just getting worse under Obama care

 

[Webster]

Suffice it to say, we shall agree to disagree, Liberty.
But make no mistake: even if the ACA is overturned at some point, the fight for universal healthcare will continue and one day, by God, it will prevail.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Suffice it to say, we shall agree to disagree, Liberty.
But make no mistake: even if the ACA is overturned at some point, the fight for universal healthcare will continue and one day, by God, it will prevail.

Not in our life time it won't prevail. Obama care has made people quite disgusted with anything government run with our healthcare. But some other dum generation will come around that had forgotten all about the nightmares of obam care and will say oh this communist idea of government rationing all our health care that is such a great idea.

 

[Webster]

Suffice it to say, we shall agree to disagree, Liberty.
But make no mistake: even if the ACA is overturned at some point, the fight for universal healthcare will continue and one day, by God, it will prevail.

Not in our life time it won't prevail. Obama care has made people quite disgusted with anything government run with our healthcare. But some other dum generation will come around that had forgotten all about the nightmares of obam care and will say oh this communist idea of government rationing all our health care that is such a great idea.

Like I said, we agree to disagree.