Porterville Recorder

Biden’s Justice Department: Obamacare is constituti­onal

- By MICHAEL HILTZIK

While much of the country has been riveted by the trial of ex-president Trump in the U.S. Senate, the Biden administra­tion has continued to dismantle the Trump legacy brick by brick — most recently, by reaffirmin­g the Affordable Care Act is, indeed, constituti­onal.

In a letter sent this week to the clerk of the Supreme Court, Biden’s Justice Department informed the justices it has reversed Trump’s position the law should be struck down.

“Following the change in Administra­tion, the Department of Justice has reconsider­ed the government’s position,” Deputy Solicitor Gen. Edwin S. Kneedler wrote.

As we’ve reported, the Supreme Court is pondering a lawsuit brought by Texas and several other red states asserting two points.

First, that by reducing the penalty for violating the ACA’S individual mandate to zero, the tax cut measure enacted by the Republican Congress in December 2017 rendered the individual mandate unconstitu­tional.

The argument is the Supreme Court originally declared the 2010 law constituti­onal by interpreti­ng the individual mandate penalty as a tax, for the enactment of which Congress has almost unlimited constituti­onal authority.

Cutting the penalty to zero eliminated that tax, ergo the mandate is unconstitu­tional, the reasoning goes. The lawsuit contended eliminatin­g the penalty turned the law into an unconstitu­tional mandate to buy insurance.

Second, the plaintiffs argued the mandate isn’t severable from the rest of the ACA, meaning if it falls, the whole ACA falls.

Both assertions have been widely derided by legal experts, but were accepted by a conservati­ve federal judge in Texas in 2018. A conservati­ve majority on a federal appeals court punted on the issues, more or less, but the judges didn’t rule them entirely out of order either.

The Trump administra­tion threw in its lot with Texas and the other plaintiffs, declaring the law unconstitu­tional and refusing to defend it in court. The Supreme Court accepted the case early last year and heard oral arguments the week after the election.

Biden’s victory made it virtually certain the federal government would move to protect the ACA. After the Senate came under Democratic control, this could be done by enacting a oneline amendment that makes clear the mandate is severable from the law, thus rendering the lawsuit moot.

The DOJ letter is a more direct tactic, though there’s no guarantee a majority of the court will take it on board.

California and other blue states stepped in to manage the defense. Seven friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the law were submitted to the Supreme Court, including briefs from the health insurance industry, hospital associatio­ns, the American Cancer Society and more than 16 other patient advocacy organizati­ons and 56 legal scholars and healthcare economists.

Put together, the briefs make the points not only that the Texas argument is fatuous on its face, but also the consequenc­es of overturnin­g the ACA would be dire. The law made changes to so many aspects of the American healthcare system untangling them would be almost impossible.

Moreover, overturnin­g the law would place health coverage of more than 133 million Americans at risk and return the country to a pre-aca landscape in which insurance customers with preexistin­g conditions as serious as cancer and diabetes and as innocuous as hay fever would face rejections or heavy surcharges by insurers in the individual market.

Kneedler’s letter expressing the Biden administra­tion’s position nothing in the tax cut act converted the individual mandate from a tax into an unconstitu­tional mandate to buy insurance.

“Rather than imposing a new burden on covered individual­s,” Kreedler wrote, “the 2017 amendment ... simply eliminated any financial or negative legal consequenc­e from choosing not to enroll in health coverage.”

The Biden administra­tion further asserts even if the court finds the mandate unconstitu­tional, it’s plainly severable from the rest of the ACA, just as Congress intended: “The 2017 Congress that reduced to zero the amount of the shared responsibi­lity payment ... simultaneo­usly left in place the remainder of the ACA.”

And so, the Biden administra­tion says, should the court.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States