Menu
Tax Notes logo

ACA Individual Mandate Fight Could Head to Supreme Court

Posted on Jan. 6, 2020

The Supreme Court will have a chance to weigh in on a controversial case that threatens the future of the Affordable Care Act.

Several states and the District of Columbia filed a petition January 3 asking the Court to review a recent decision that found the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional.

“We’re asking the Supreme Court to swiftly resolve this repeal lawsuit for the sake of saving lives and ending uncertainty in our healthcare system,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement.

California is one of 20 states seeking review in the case.

A Texas federal court issued a decision at the end of 2018 finding that the ACA was unconstitutional. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas said that because the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act had reduced the individual mandate penalty to zero, it ceased to function as a tax. It further found that the provision was inseverable from the rest of the ACA, rendering the entire law unconstitutional.

The decision drew criticism from some observers, but in December 2019 the Fifth Circuit affirmed that “the individual mandate is unconstitutional because it can no longer be read as a tax, and there is no other constitutional provision that justifies this exercise of congressional power.”

However, the circuit court remanded on the issue of severability, finding that the district court’s analysis was incomplete.

‘Enormous Practical Significance’

The petition filed by the states asks the Supreme Court to review the individual mandate issue, the plaintiffs’ standing, and the question of severability. The petitioners argue that the Fifth Circuit’s decision warrants immediate review.

“This Court normally grants certiorari when a lower court has invalidated a federal statutory provision on constitutional grounds, and that customary approach is especially appropriate here,” the petition says. “The actions of the lower courts have cast doubt on hundreds of other statutory provisions that together regulate a substantial portion of the Nation’s economy.”

The states argue that the plaintiffs who initially challenged the law lack standing. They also claim that there is no constitutional defect with the individual mandate.

“As amended, Section 5000A is merely a precatory provision that (at most) encourages Americans to buy health insurance but does not compel anyone to do anything,” the petition says.

The states also claim that the severability issue depends on the intent of Congress. They argue that in this case, it’s clear that the intent was to leave the rest of the ACA intact. The states say there is no reason for the Supreme Court to defer review on the issue given the “enormous practical significance of this case.”

The case being appealed is Texas v. United States, No. 19-10011 (5th Cir. 2019).

Copy RID