The federal judge who ruled that Obamacare is unconstitutional will allow the law to remain in place as it goes through the appeals process.
U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in the Northern District of Texas, who said the law was not constitutional because Congress had zeroed out the fine on the uninsured, stayed the law in an order issued Sunday. The ruling is likely to face an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans. It may make its way to the Supreme Court.
Recommended Stories
Democratic attorneys general have vowed to appeal the ruling and had asked O’Connor for the stay.
The initial ruling by O’Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, strikes down all of the healthcare law, formally known as the Affordable Care Act. The provisions include the expansion of government-funded Medicaid to the poor, obligating that insurers cover people with pre-existing illnesses, and provisions allowing people under the age of 26 to remain on their parents’ health insurance plans.
[Related: With Obamacare in limbo, GOP revives calls for new healthcare law]
O’Connor wrote in his ruling staying the decision that “many everyday Americans would otherwise face great uncertainty during the pendency of appeal.”
The lawsuit in the case, Texas v. Azar, was brought by 20 Republican state officials, who asked that all of Obamacare be thrown out as a consequence of the new tax law, which zeroed out a penalty on the uninsured, known as the “individual mandate.” The officials argued that the penalty was central to making the rest of the law work, and that without it, the rest should crumble.
Trump’s Department of Justice had joined the lawsuit but asked specifically that the rules on pre-existing illnesses be struck down. These rules prohibit health insurance companies from turning away sick customers, from charging them more for their illness, or from refusing to cover medical services associated with managing their condition.
