As I told you earlier this month, we were determining which course of action we would take in appealing our decision by a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. upholding the constitutionality of a key part of ObamaCare.
We have decided to appeal the decision by the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit directly to the Supreme Court of the United States, which already has scheduled to hear several challenges to ObamaCare.
In its decision earlier this month, the federal appeals court failed to reinstate our lawsuit and upheld the constitutionality of the individual mandate, which forces Americans to purchase health insurance under penalty of law.
As the high court prepares to hear the Florida challenge and others, we have filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the high court, posted here, urging the Justices to consider our appeal now or hold it until it decides the Florida cases.
The Court could decide to grant what's known as a "GVR" order - Grant, Vacate, and Remand. Specifically, if the Court doesn't take our case now, we're suggesting that the high court hold our petition pending the disposition of the Florida case, and then grant certiorari, vacate the decision below, and remand for further proceedings in light of this Court's decision in the Florida cases.
We also argue that the D.C. Circuit's decision in favor of the individual mandate conflicts with the Supreme Court's own jurisprudence.
In our petition filed with the Court, we contend: " . . . the D.C. Circuit's decision conflicts with this Court's acknowledgment, more than two centuries ago, that '[t]he powers of the legislature are defined, and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?' Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 176 (1803)."
In addition to pursuing our own legal challenge, we've been involved in backing other challenges to ObamaCare. As you may recall, we filed an amicus brief representing 105 members of Congress and more than 29,000 Americans urging the high court to take the Florida case, which it did.
Now, we're preparing an amicus brief to file with the high court backing Florida's position that the individual mandate violates the Commerce Clause. Once again, we'll be representing members of Congress (expecting to sign-on more than 100 members) and thousands of concerned Americans opposed to ObamaCare. At this point, more than 100,000 Americans have signed on and more names are being added every day.
The high court will hear oral arguments in the ObamaCare challenges in March with a decision expected by the end of the term this summer.
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has filed an amicus brief in a suit brought by 16 states and two individual plaintiffs challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare’s individual mandate. As you probably remember, the individual mandate required millions of Americans to buy and...
Loopholes in President Obama’s signature legislative achievement have defrauded American taxpayers $3.5 Billion dollars in excess ObamaCare credits, and they can’t get it back. Reports indicate that the IRS paid a total of nearly $24 billion in ObamaCare subsidies in 2017. Of that figure, $5.8...
Last year shortly after the election, the ACLJ issued its Agenda for the Future . We urged the incoming administration to immediately repeal and replace ObamaCare with a focus on the advancement of a patient-centered, consumer-driven program that emphasizes choice and competition . Today, we renew...
President Trump just signed an Executive Order “to Promote Healthcare Choice and Competition.” This Executive Order allows small businesses to unite to purchase healthcare across state lines and avoid portions of ObamaCare’s onerous mandates and failing healthcare markets. The President has...