Democratic State AGs Take First Step in Appealing 'Ludicrous' Ruling Killing ACA
The group of states, led by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, are expected to argue that the law's individual mandate remains constitutional despite a federal tax law passed in 2017 that zeroed out its tax penalty.
January 03, 2019 at 03:05 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
The coalition of state attorneys general defending the Affordable Care Act have taken the first step in appealing a federal judge's ruling in Texas that declared the entirety of the 2010 law unconstitutional.
The group of states, led by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, are expected to argue that the law's individual mandate remains constitutional despite a federal tax law passed in 2017 that zeroed out its tax penalty. The AGs contend that even if the individual mandate is struck down, the rest of the law's provisions should be allowed to stand.
The states filed their notice of appeal in the Northern District of Texas on Thursday. The attorneys general in a call with reporters described the underlying ruling by U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor of the Northern District of Texas as based on a “flimsy theory” and “ludicrous.”
The case will go before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Phil Weiser, the state attorney general-elect in Colorado, indicated Thursday that he plans to join the coalition of states defending the Affordable Care Act. Weiser said O'Connor's ruling finding the ACA's individual mandate is inseverable from the whole law goes against the “mainstream view on all sides of the aisle.”
“Congress had the opportunity to, and did not, repeal the law,” Weiser said. “It's not for a judge to then effectively repeal the whole law. All Congress did, and all that this law is based on is it reduced the tax penalty. To take that action and try to leverage it into invalidating the entire law … it's an affront to the rule of law.”
The AGs' filing comes shortly after O'Connor stayed his ruling Dec. 30 after finding residents in many states have already purchased their health insurance plans for 2019.
O'Connor initially ruled Dec. 14 that a congressional tax law passed in 2017, which zeroed out the penalty imposed by the ACA's individual mandate, rendered the whole health care law unconstitutional.
A group of mostly conservative states, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed their constitutional challenge to the ACA in February. Those states contended that the congressional tax law effectively rendered the individual mandate unconstitutional, as well as two protections they said were inseverable from the mandate: the law's community rating requirement and its guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions.
Becerra and the cluster of Democratic state attorneys general have led the fight defending the health care law's survival after the Justice Department dropped its defense in June.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
Delaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
3 minute readThe Week in Data Dec. 19: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Davis Polk Moves to New, Expanded Redwood City Office
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250