Texas Judge Stays His ACA Ruling, but Adds an Appeal Is Unlikely to Succeed
In issuing a stay, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor said most people have already bought their health insurance plans for 2019.
December 30, 2018 at 07:50 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A federal judge in Texas who declared the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional earlier in December stayed his ruling pending an appeal since residents in many states have already purchased their health insurance plans for 2019.
U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor of the Northern District of Texas broadly upheld his initial Dec. 14 ruling, but said Americans would face great uncertainty during the appeal without a stay. O'Connor did say the states intervening to defend the ACA failed to show a likelihood they could succeed on appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
In entering a partial final judgment and stay, O'Connor said Congress can sever the individual mandate from the ACA, but that the courts cannot do that. O'Connor added that congressional intent clearly indicated lawmakers did not intend to sever the individual mandate.
“The more courts step into breaches for Congress, the more courts will be called upon to step into breaches for Congress,” O'Connor wrote Saturday. “That would represent a fundamental shift in the Constitution's careful balancing of powers—not only on the Judiciary-Legislature plane, but also on the citizen-government plane.”
O'Connor's initial 55-page ruling issued Dec. 14 found that last year's congressional action eliminating the penalty imposed by the ACA's individual mandate made the whole law unconstitutional. O'Connor's decision said the demise of the mandate rendered the entire law invalid because it could not be severed from the mandate.
Democratic attorneys general who intervened in the case immediately vowed to appeal to the Fifth Circuit, putting the ACA on the path to review in the next year or so by the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld the law in 2012.
O'Connor's underlying ruling came after “health insurers have already locked in benefits and prices for 2019 health coverage and are almost done with ordinary applicant enrollment for 2019 coverage,” according to affiliate publication Benefits Pro.
The 17 state attorneys general defending the ACA in lieu of the DOJ, which announced in June it would not defend the ACA, said O'Connor's decision lacked clarity, and filed an expedited motion seeking to continue the defense of the ACA. The motion also asked O'Connor to certify the opinion so it could be immediately appealed, or to stay the ruling pending an appeal.
Read the order:
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPolsinelli Hires Data Privacy, Tech Transactions Partner From Kirkland & Ellis
Many Lawyers Are Reeling From Election Results, but Leaders Are Staying Mum
6 minute readQuantum Computing Company to Part With General Counsel
California-Based Portal Crypto Exchange Faces Delaware Investor Class Action
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Who Should Pay? Insurer Wants No Part of $30M Sexual Abuse Settlement
- 2Passenger Sues Frontier Airlines for Burns Sustained From In-Flight Beverage
- 3Who Are Trump's Potential Candidates for Attorney General?
- 4Drugmaker Wins $70.5M After Fed Judge Says Generic Sales Were Blocked
- 5Out of Thin Scienter: Protecting Confidential Information in Light of ‘NVIDIA v. Ohman’
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250