SCOTUS Prepares To Hear Major Case That Could Invalidate Obamacare

YES let’s rid our nation of the atrocity that is Obamacare!

Watch, Obama will come out of nowhere and try to take credit for any positive changes that come from this.

“If I didn’t make things as awful as they were, they wouldn’t be as great as they are now!”

I don’t care how many ways they want to rewrite this dumpster fire piece of legislation, it’s garbage through and through, entirely ineffective, and needs to disappear.

The Obamacare mandate has fluctuated its framework of constitutionality for quite some time, regarding the imposed penalties on citizens who did not purchase health insurance, suggesting the penalty was constitutional because it was to be considered a tax, then, after ACA was amended with a penalty of zero, it was deemed no longer constitutional.

Amy Howe stated:

A group of states led by Texas (along with several individuals) went to federal court, where they argued that because the penalty for not buying health insurance is zero, it is no longer a tax and the mandate is therefore unconstitutional. And the mandate is such an integral part of the ACA, they contended, that the rest of the law must be struck down as well.

Due to two petitions that were being circulated, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear out oral arguments this upcoming Fall to decide the constitutionality of Obamacare.

The Daily Wire reported:

Two petitions revolving around Obamacare,  one by Democratic states and one from Republican states, want the Supreme Court to review a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that invalidated Obamacare.

Amy Howe stated:

In 2012, Chief Justice John Roberts agreed with the court’s four more liberal justices that the mandate was constitutional because the penalty imposed on individuals who did not buy health insurance was a tax, which the Constitution allows Congress to impose. But in 2017, Congress enacted an amendment to the ACA that set the penalty for not buying health insurance at zero – but left the rest of the ACA in place. That change led to the dispute that is now before the court: A group of states led by Texas (along with several individuals) went to federal court, where they argued that because the penalty for not buying health insurance is zero, it is no longer a tax and the mandate is therefore unconstitutional. And the mandate is such an integral part of the ACA, they contended, that the rest of the law must be struck down as well.

Today the Supreme Court granted California’s petition for review, which asks the justices to weigh in on three questions: whether the challengers have a legal right to sue at all; whether the mandate is now unconstitutional; and whether, if the mandate is unconstitutional, it can be separated from the rest of the ACA.

The justices also granted a cross-petition filed by Texas, which asks the court to decide whether the district court was correct in deeming the entire ACA invalid.

The two petitions will be consolidated for one hour of oral argument. The oral argument will likely be scheduled for October of this year, in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election, although the justices almost certainly will not issue their ruling until after the election – and probably even the inauguration.