Obamacare, Ruled Invalid by Federal Judge, Will Remain in Effect During Appeal

The judge, Reed O’Connor of U.S. District Court in Fort Worth, said the ruling should not go into immediate effect “because many everyday Americans would otherwise face great uncertainty” during an appeal.

The ruling opened the door for an appeal by California and 15 other states that support the health care law.

O’Connor’s original ruling had caused some confusion because it came as many states were finishing up open enrollment for 2019. Though he ruled that the law’s individual mandate was unconstitutional and that the rest of the law was therefore invalid, he did not issue an injunction stopping the law from being enforced.

The Affordable Care Act includes not only health insurance exchanges and an expansion of Medicaid, but also protections for people with pre-existing conditions, requirements for what insurance must cover and other provisions.

In a lawsuit this year, a group of Republican governors and state attorneys general, led by Texas, challenged the Affordable Care Act, arguing that the requirement that people have health insurance — known as the individual mandate — was unconstitutional.

The individual mandate was enforced by a tax penalty on people who go without insurance. The Supreme Court upheld the law in 2012 as an exercise of Congress’ taxing power. But as part of the tax overhaul that President Donald Trump signed in December 2017, Congress reduced the penalty to zero dollars, starting in 2019. Texas and the other plaintiffs contend that the mandate will now lose its constitutional justification.

In a ruling on Dec. 14, O’Connor agreed that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and that other provisions of the law could not survive without it. On Sunday, he affirmed that view and said that California and other states supporting the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, were “unlikely to succeed” in their appeal.

The Trump administration did not object to delaying enforcement of O’Connor’s earlier ruling. Immediate enforcement of the ruling could cause confusion and “disruption to the health care markets,” the Justice Department told the court Dec. 21.

In a statement Sunday, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said he would “march forward” in his fight to keep health care affordable and accessible. “We’re going to protect the health care of Americans and make clear that the ACA is the law of the land,” he said.

California plans to file an appeal “imminently,” a spokeswoman for the state’s attorney general said Sunday.

Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general who initiated the lawsuit, said in a statement that he had “no quarrel” with the court’s decision to issue a stay because it offers states “an opportunity to develop plans to address the health care needs of their residents for the day this ruling is ultimately upheld.”

“We are eager to defend the district court’s ruling declaring Obamacare unconstitutional,” Paxton said.

The case is likely to be taken up by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans — and many experts believe it will ultimately make its way to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has historically been reluctant to strike down federal laws, particularly those that have become ingrained in the lives of millions of citizens.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.