Nessel said it is"more likely that they will allow the case to go back down to the district court." Becerra agreed it is “late in the season for the court to be accepting cases" for its current term, which ends in June.
The new challenge stems from the $1.5 trillion tax cut passed by Congress in 2017, which repealed the health care law's tax on people who refuse to buy insurance. That tax was intended to prod them into the health care marketplace rather than let them seek emergency care while uninsured.put on hold, protection for people with preexisting conditions, subsidies for low-income people, Medicaid expansions in many states, coverage for young adults up to age 26 and more.
Rather than strike down the entire law, as O'Connor did, the panel sent the case back to district court for"additional analysis" on whether the individual mandate can be severed from the rest of the statute. For now, consumers will not be affected by the ruling.
Good! Unconstitutional to begin with !
Flip your cash to make more $$$ in just 45mins and thank me later, ask me how?
I sure hope it craps. California has a mandate and my insurance is cheaper without maternity and gender reassignment coverage, yet there is a tax penalty for not paying into someone else's preferences.
Great am happy too
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: USATODAY - 🏆 100. / 63 Read more »
Source: L.A. Times Health - 🏆 364. / 59 Read more »