Why obama care violates the constitution

The lawsuit is being filed in Maryland federal court by the cities of Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati and Columbus, Ohio. Since Trump's first executive order directing federal agencies to claw back as much of the Affordable Care Act as possible, his directives have increased health coverage costs and depressed enrollment, the complainants say. On Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar announced a plan for cheaper, short-term insurance plans, the latest example of actions that critics say will drive up costs on Obamacare exchanges.

We have great health care," he said. New programs are coming out. Individual Mandate is gone and great, less expensive plans will be announced this month. ObamaCare is a broken mess. Piece by piece we will now begin the process of giving America the great HealthCare it deserves! As I said from the beginning, let ObamaCare implode, then deal. As I have always said, let ObamaCare fail and then come together and do a great healthcare plan.

Stay tuned! Rather Trump has been frank that he is sabotaging the law, she said. The states urged the justices to take the case and resolve it this term, ahead of the presidential election. The top court did not indicate when it will hear the case, but it will likely do so in its term beginning in October.

A decision would be expected by the end of June , after the next presidential term has begun. The case is the latest challenge to the law, more commonly known as Obamacare, which has twice before withstood challenges at the Supreme Court. Obamacare has been the target of Republican attacks in the courts since it was first passed nearly 10 years ago. It has so far withstood scrutiny from the justices.

The current lawsuit against it is based on a technical reading of Chief Justice John Roberts' reason for upholding the law in If impact on interstate commerce were to be expressed and calculated mathematically, the status of being uninsured would necessarily be represented by zero. Of course, any other figure multiplied by zero is also zero.

Consequently, the impact must be zero, and of no effect on interstate commerce. The uninsured can only be said to have a substantial effect on interstate commerce in the manner as described by the defendants: i if they get sick or injured; ii if they are still uninsured at that specific point in time; iii if they seek medical care for that sickness or injury; iv if they are unable to pay for the medical care received; and v if they are unable or unwilling to make payment arrangements directly with the health care provider, or with assistance of family, friends, and charitable groups, and the costs are thereafter shifted to others.

And when they do, Congress plainly has the power to regulate them at that time or even at the time that they initially seek medical care , a fact with which the plaintiffs agree. The problem with this legal rationale, however, is it would essentially have unlimited application. There is quite literally no decision that, in the natural course of events, does not have an economic impact of some sort. It is not difficult to identify an economic decision that has a cumulatively substantial effect on interstate commerce; rather, the difficult task is to find a decision that does not.

Congress must operate within the bounds established by the Constitution. For the reasons stated, I must reluctantly conclude that Congress exceeded the bounds of its authority in passing the Act with the individual mandate.

Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications. Only the Supreme Court or a Constitutional amendment can expand that. Live Now. Policy Report. Current Archives. James Madison, the chief architect of our federalist system, observed in Federalist No. Download the Policy Report Article.

About the Author.