Fifth Circuit Freezes Big Obamacare Case Amid Government Shutdown
The order comes as the nation edges toward its longest shutdown in history.
January 11, 2019 at 11:49 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Friday hit pause on an appeal looking to keep the Affordable Care Act the law of the land, despite opposition from a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general who want to push forward amid the government shutdown.
The order, signed by Judge Leslie Southwick, comes as the nation edges toward its longest shutdown in history. Federal courts are expected to run out of contingency funds on Jan. 18, and some district judges have already paused civil cases that involve federal agencies.
The Administrative Office of the United States Courts was expected to issue shutdown guidance Thursday. That memo never came, and district courts are still awaiting guidance.
The Justice Department has pushed to pause many civil cases across the country in trial and appellate courts, arguing the federal Antideficiency Act generally precludes federal officials from working during a lapse in appropriations. There is an exception under for cases involving human life and the protection of property.
The coalition of states attorneys general, led by California's Xavier Becerra, are appealing a district court ruling that declared the entire 2010 law unconstitutional after congress zeroed out its individual mandate, or tax penalty, in 2017. Judge Reed O'Connor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled on Dec. 14 that the individual mandate could not be severed from the whole law.
They face a coalition of state attorneys general looking to undo the Obama-era law, led by Texas' Ken Paxton.
O'Connor stayed his ruling on Dec. 30, finding that Americans would face great uncertainty during the appeal. O'Connor also noted most Americans have already purchased their health insurance plans for the following year.
The attorneys general, who are defending the law after the Justice Department under President Donald Trump opted not to, have criticized O'Connor's decision as based on a “flimsy theory” and “ludicrous.”
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This content has been archived.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 AllLitigators of the Week: A Win for Homeless Veterans On the VA's West LA Campus
'The Most Peculiar Federal Court in the Country' Comes to Berkeley Law
The New Federal Sentencing Factor in Downstate New York? Prison Conditions
'Vision': Judge David Tatel on the Value of Oral Argument and Reading Drafts Aloud
Trending Stories
- 1Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
- 2State Bar of Georgia Presents Access to Justice Pro Bono Awards
- 3Tips For Creating Holiday Plans That Everyone Can Be Grateful For
- 4Red Tape, Talent Wars & Pricey Office Space Greet Firms Entering Saudi Arabia
- 5A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Becoming Clerk of the Forum
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