https://youtube.com/watch?v=TRFOse8UZzc
A panel of experienced Washington lawyers convened at National Review’s DC office on Monday to discuss the upcoming Supreme Court term, with the legal scholars splitting over whether the nine justices will take up three cases that could decide Obamacare’s fate.
James Burling, the litigation director of the Pacific Legal Foundation, which co-sponsored the event, broke down the cases waiting in the wings. Two involve the language of the Affordable Care Act, which specified that only “states,” and not the federal government, could set up insurance exchanges. That means the federal exchanges set up in 27 states are illegal under the law — at least according to the plaintiff’s argument.
The other case deals with the “tax versus penalty” argument that the Court took up back in 2012. This time, plaintiffs are questioning at whether the “tax” — the term the Court gave the individual penalty for not purchasing insurance — was properly filed.
“These cases are going to eventually wend their way back up to the Supreme Court,” Burling said. “So the Supreme Court will have a chance of fixing whatever it did the last time it ruled on healthcare — or not, as the case may be.”
Appellate law attorney Lisa Blatt felt differently. “The conventional wisdom is that the Court will take this healthcare case,” she said. “I’m definitely not of that view . . . I don’t necessarily see the Court as just dying to strike Obamacare . . . It’s not clear to me there’ll be a split.”
John Elwood, another appellate attorney, struck a balance. While claiming the Court may pick up the cases, he said it’s “not beyond the pale that they might want to stay out of it if the issue remains splitless.”
Watch the entire panel here, courtesy of C-Span.