The right-wing dominated Supreme Court will hear arguments today whether or not to strike down the Affordable Care Act and all of its provisions in the middle of a growing COVID-19 pandemic. Previous Supreme Courts, with a slim conservative majority have been augmented by three Justices nominated by lawless demagogue and mentally unstable lame duck Donald "COVID Donnie" Trump, the latest being the replacement of the beloved progressive icon Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with right-wing Amy Coney Barrett, a protege of the late reactionary Justice Antonin Scalia. In court opposing the ACA are 18 Republican-controlled states and the Trump Justice Department.
The Republican argument rests on three premises:
"Do the challengers — two individuals and 18 states led by Texas — have legal standing to bring the case? Did changes made by Congress in 2017 render unconstitutional the ACA’s requirement for individuals to buy insurance? And if so, can the rest of the law be separated out, or must it fall in its entirety?
Lower courts have answered the first two questions yes, but the third — the most important — has not been resolved." (our emphasis)
Over the years, Republican Congresses have tried to repeal the ACA dozens of times, only to fail. Their professed desire to replace the ACA has never materialized either. In 2017, the Republican Congress eliminated the individual mandate, which effectively taxed people that chose not to purchase insurance:
"When the Republican-controlled Congress failed to kill the ACA in 2017, it did what it thought was the next best thing: It reduced to zero the penalty for not complying with the mandate.
Texas and other red states seized on that to say it could no longer be seen as a tax — it raises no revenue — and the court’s 2012 reason for upholding the law was gone.
'The ACA contains an unconstitutional command that can no longer be saved as a tax,' Texas argues.
But those defending the law say that’s too clever. For one thing, if the penalty for not complying with the mandate is zero, the plaintiffs and the states are not harmed and thus lack the essential ingredient for bringing a lawsuit." (our emphasis)
Most legal observers, even some conservative ones, believe this case is the weakest of all prior challenges to the ACA. But that may not be enough to thwart the malicious desire of the right-wing members of the Court to strike down the law.
UPDATE: The questioning so far seems to indicate skepticism with the Republican argument about severability. Fingers crossed.
