ET By Chris Matthews. Program to kill Grand Canyon bison terminates 4 animals, raises concerns High inflation causes meat, sugar and other grocery staple prices to soar Record 4. I rebuilt my life after hitting rock bottom at My estranged daughter says she only wants my money and jewelry. A federal judge in Texas agreed, and the 5th U. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld that ruling. California and 19 other blue states asked the Supreme Court to overturn the lower-court decisions.
They said that with the tax penalty at zero, there effectively is no individual mandate, so the law is not unconstitutional.
It may encourage Americans to buy insurance, but it does not require anyone to do anything, they said. The Supreme Court's newest member, Barrett, was considered a possible vote in agreement with the Republican states. In a law review article, she said the Roberts opinion "pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute. The red states said Congress meant the health care law to work as an integrated whole. Prohibiting insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions and allowing young people to stay longer on the policies of their parents were meant to work because of the near-universal command to buy insurance.
The decision in California vs. Texas preserves health insurance subsidies for more than 20 million Americans and protections for tens of millions more whose preexisting medical conditions could otherwise prevent them from obtaining coverage. The Texas suit, the third major effort to strike down the national healthcare law, fizzled out in a decision. Two Trump appointees — Justices Brett M.
Roberts Jr. Justice Clarence Thomas concurred. Justices Neil M. Gorsuch, also a Trump appointee, and Samuel A. Alito Jr.
In the ruling — and similarly in a separate unanimous decision Thursday that pitted gay rights against religious liberties — Roberts and his colleagues surprised many by finding a way to bring together those on the right and left, rather than issue the usual decision that has often divided the bench on such culture-war cases.
They did so by keeping the decision narrowly focused and not making a broad pronouncement on the law. The justices avoided dealing again with the constitutionality of the law and instead said simply that the suit should have been dismissed at the start. Justice Stephen G. Here's how Breyer put it:. The Supreme Court dismissed a challenge to the Affordable Care Act on Thursday in a decision that will leave the law intact and save health care for millions of Americans. The justices turned away a challenge from republican led states and the former Trump administration who urged the justices to block the entire law.
The justices said that the challengers of the law did not have the legal right to bring the case. Justice Stephen Breyer penned the decision that was Read the full opinion here:. Justice Breyer penned the decision that was
0コメント