Even the Conservative Justices Are Sick of Obamacare Cases

Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh don’t seem like they’re buying the argument to strike down the ACA.

Alex Brandon/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday morning in the Trump-backed lawsuit that threatens to undo the entirety of the Affordable Care Act—but even the court’s conservative justices seemed skeptical of tossing out the whole law.

The case hinges on whether the essential eradication of the individual mandate—the part of the law that requires people to pay a penalty for lacking insurance, which was set to $0 as a part of tax cuts passed by Congress in 2017—invalidates the rest of the ACA. And while the case is far from decided, conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh, suggested that they believed that the individual mandate could be excised from the ACA without tarnishing the rest of the law.

As the New York Times reports:

But at least five justices, including two members of the court’s conservative majority, indicated that they were not inclined to strike down the balance of the law. In legal terms, they said the mandate was severable from the rest of the law.

“It does seem fairly clear that the proper remedy would be to sever the mandate provision and leave the rest of the law in place,” said Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. made a similar point. “Congress left the rest of the law intact when it lowered the penalty to zero,” he said.

That’s right: The lawsuit is so weak that it appears, at least on their questioning during oral arguments, that even the court’s most conservative justices think it’s a legally dubious. Other conservatives on the court also asked questions about the standing of the Republican state attorneys general who brought the case as plaintiffs, leaving open the possibility that a larger majority of the court could reject the case on issues of standing without ruling on the merits (questions from the three liberal justices all indicated skepticism of the case). Of course questions during oral arguments are not always indicative of how a Supreme Court justice will vote on a final ruling, so the fate of the entire ACA remains in limbo until the court offers its final decision.

But the general tone of Tuesday’s arguments bodes well for the millions of Americans who rely on the ACA or expanded Medicaid for their coverage, or who benefit from provisions like those that protect people with pre-existing conditions or allow young adults to stay on their parents’ plans until age 26.

A ruling on the case isn’t expected until sometime in 2021.

GREAT JOURNALISM, SLOW FUNDRAISING

Our team has been on fire lately—publishing sweeping, one-of-a-kind investigations, ambitious, groundbreaking projects, and even releasing “the holy shit documentary of the year.” And that’s on top of protecting free and fair elections and standing up to bullies and BS when others in the media don’t.

Yet, we just came up pretty short on our first big fundraising campaign since Mother Jones and the Center for Investigative Reporting joined forces.

So, two things:

1) If you value the journalism we do but haven’t pitched in over the last few months, please consider doing so now—we urgently need a lot of help to make up for lost ground.

2) If you’re not ready to donate but you’re interested enough in our work to be reading this, please consider signing up for our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter to get to know us and our reporting better. Maybe once you do, you’ll see it’s something worth supporting.

payment methods

GREAT JOURNALISM, SLOW FUNDRAISING

Our team has been on fire lately—publishing sweeping, one-of-a-kind investigations, ambitious, groundbreaking projects, and even releasing “the holy shit documentary of the year.” And that’s on top of protecting free and fair elections and standing up to bullies and BS when others in the media don’t.

Yet, we just came up pretty short on our first big fundraising campaign since Mother Jones and the Center for Investigative Reporting joined forces.

So, two things:

1) If you value the journalism we do but haven’t pitched in over the last few months, please consider doing so now—we urgently need a lot of help to make up for lost ground.

2) If you’re not ready to donate but you’re interested enough in our work to be reading this, please consider signing up for our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter to get to know us and our reporting better. Maybe once you do, you’ll see it’s something worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate