Feature

The fate of the ACA now rests with the U.S. Supreme Court


 

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear Texas v. California, a closely watched case that could upend the Affordable Care Act.

Supreme Court building ETIENJones/thinkstockphotos

The justices will hear oral arguments in the case in fall 2020, with a ruling likely in 2021.

The Texas case, consolidated with a similar challenge, stems from a lawsuit by 20 Republican state attorneys general and governors that was filed after Congress zeroed out the ACA’s individual mandate penalty in 2017. The plaintiffs contend the now-valueless mandate is no longer constitutional and thus, the entire ACA should be struck down. Since the Trump administration declined to defend the ACA, a coalition of Democratic attorneys general and governors intervened in the case as defendants.

In 2018, a Texas district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and declared the entire health care law invalid. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals partially affirmed the district court’s decision, ruling that the mandate was unconstitutional, but sending the case back to the lower court for more analysis on severability. On March 2, the U.S. Supreme Court granted two petitions by the defendants requesting that the high court review the appeals court decision.

The review follows a previous look at the ACA’s mandate by the Supreme Court in 2012. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, justices upheld the ACA’s insurance mandate as constitutional, ruling the requirement was authorized by Congress’ power to levy taxes. The vote was 5-4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. in agreement with the court’s four more liberal members.

Recommended Reading

U.S. cancer centers embroiled in Chinese research thefts
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Funding failures: Tobacco prevention and cessation
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
CMS proposes second specialty tier for Medicare drugs
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
An epidemic of fear and misinformation
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Oncologists are average in terms of happiness, survey suggests
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Some relevant financial conflicts go undisclosed in ACR guidelines
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
‘Momentous’ USMLE change: New pass/fail format stuns medicine
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Medical malpractice insurance premiums likely to rise in 2020
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
FDA, FTC uniting to promote biosimilars
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Supreme Court roundup: Latest health care decisions
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management