Supreme Court Won’t Decide Obamacare’s Fate Before The Election

The US Supreme Court is seen in Washington, DC, on January 31, 2017. / AFP PHOTO / SAUL LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The Supreme Court denied Tuesday a request that it fast-track a review of a Texas lawsuit seeking to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. The rejection the request, made by the legal defenders of the law, means that Obamacare’s fate won’t be decided before the 2020 election, taking political pressure off of President Trump and Republicans.

The Republican lawsuit argues that the 2017 tax law made Obamacare’s individual mandate unconstitutional by zeroing out the tax penalty for not having health insurance. It also alleges that if the mandate is unconstitutional, the whole law — including its Medicaid expansion and protections for pre-existing conditions — must be invalidated.

Already, a federal judge has agreed with the challengers — who are being supported by Trump’s Justice Department — on both points. An appeals court recently backed the finding that the mandate was unconstitutional, but ordered the the trial judge to re-examine his finding on whether the rest of the law could be severed from the mandate.

That process could take several months, prompting the Obamacare’s defenders — which in the case include blue states and the U.S. House of Representatives — to seek an immediate Supreme Court intervention.

While the Supreme Court may ultimately agree to take up the case, Tuesday’s order means that the justices won’t expedite their consideration of whether to do so. Under the typical, slower timeline, the earliest the case, if granted, could be heard is next term.

It takes only four votes to take up a case, meaning the court’s liberal wing might still have the votes to grant review of the lawsuit. However, five votes were necessary to get the case fast-tracked.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. A gift to Trump and the Republicans by CJ Roberts who is also presiding over the sham impeachment trial.

  2. Obviously this bodes poorly for the ACA. Roberts and the other 4 right wingers plan to kill the ACA after the election.

  3. Yup, who cares if millions with preexisting conditions lose their health insurance. Republicans certainly don’t nor does the Supreme Court.

  4. The Dems can also run on this. The Republican’s want to take your health insurance away.

  5. Cowards. They’re all cowards. I’m shocked to see Republicans again exposing themselves as cowards.

    Anyway. That’s fine. But any democrat, at any level who doesn’t beat Trump and Co. over the head with that lawsuit when he tries to say he ‘saved pre-existing conditions’ needs to be run out of the party. We are running on protecting this law you jelly-spined wimps. This needs to be brought up every single day, even the days when the ACA loses 2 percentage points in popularity in your internal polls.

Continue the discussion at

40 more replies


Avatar for discobot Avatar for littlegirlblue Avatar for mondfledermaus Avatar for manhattan123 Avatar for impurescience Avatar for drriddle Avatar for stradivarius50t3 Avatar for grandpajoe Avatar for leftcoaster Avatar for califdemdreamer Avatar for dm3000 Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for morrigan_2575 Avatar for ljb860 Avatar for noonm Avatar for tiowally Avatar for khyber900 Avatar for demosthenes59 Avatar for heretofore Avatar for jrw Avatar for udubtec Avatar for carolson Avatar for txlawyer Avatar for nydan516

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: