Federal appeals court rules part of Obamacare unconstitutional but not all

Federal appeals court rules part of Obamacare unconstitutional but not all

A federal appeals court in New Orleans ruled part of Obamacare unconstitutional but not all. By a vote of 2-1, the appeals court upheld part of a lower court ruling. It ruled the mandate requiring that everyone have health insurance is unconstitutional. But it suggested that the rest of the law may remain in place and sent the question back for review. This may be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Skeptic
Skeptic
tenoclock
tenoclock 2 months

Good. Get rid of it.

Herbie Goes Bananas
Herbie Goes Bananas 2 months

Does any of Obama's legacy remain?

npc8472
npc8472 2 months

I've been saying this since its inception. I dont mind the idea of a public option that people can join and get cheap hc coverage. I however always opposed forcing people to carry some sort of coverage. Since when was it constitutional to force people to purchase something from a 3rd party?

Paris Cloud
Paris Cloud 2 months

Burn it all down!

CanadaIsAlreadyGreat
CanadaIsAlreadyGreat 2 months

The answer is easy; follow Canada's lead.

porcus
porcus 2 months

HaHa! Without the individual mandate (the "tax") Obamacare is unconstitutional, by the SCOTUS' own reasoning when they first got involved. This is great that the appeals court has struck out more of it; it's not likely to survive any further scrutiny from the courts. :D Best part is that this will be YET ANOTHER WIN BY TRUMP, and another campaign pledge seen through. Huzzah! I'm a fan, strike Obamacare down and bury it in the mass grave with the other Democrat failures.

Sullivas
Sullivas 2 months

The Constitution makes no provision for any insurance nor funds as a function of the federal government. Social Security would've been declared unconstitutional if it wasn't for the argument that it was for a taxing power, even though in reality it is forced life insurance (which makes it unconstitutional).

Jörmüngandur Draugur
Jörmüngandur Draugur 2 months

What is the bit in the constitution that it crosses? would be neat to know... Arso note, republicqns wrote "obamacare", but now it's no good?

OUTRAW mf
OUTRAW mf 2 months

I predicted that the individual mandate would be found unconstitutional when the law was first passed. it only took like a decade

Jimmy P
Jimmy P 2 months

very confusing. if one part is unconstitutional, then all of it is. it was passed as one, there for ect........

AbsentSal
AbsentSal 2 months

I can live with that rule. optional government healthcare is great, but on the margins I'm currently living in, I just have to let them fine my tax returns. its bullshit making it obligatory

Seekster
Seekster 2 months

This could be interesting.

IvoryDove
IvoryDove 2 months

Without a severability clause (it has none), this headline makes no sense. If any part of the law is found invalid, the whole law is invalid. Obamacare is becoming the "Epstein suicide" of the courts. They want to keep it alive despite its blatant unconstitutionality, so they literally have to ignore the obvious.

michael zubas
michael zubas 2 months

now that is interesting, this woudl make for an interesting court case for Med4All

John
John 2 months

Ask those who work in city state and federal government agencies who pays for their healthcare

Top in U.S.
Get the App