fbpx

Halbig, et.al. v. Sebelius, et al.: Brief Update

The above-captioned case is the lawsuit challenging an IRS rule to the effect that Obamacare’s mandates and subsidies apply in states that have declined to establish a “health care exchange.” An earlier post on the case, with links to the complaint and other good stuff, is here. While the defendants’ response isn’t due until early July, plaintiffs have already filed a motion for summary judgment, which is here. Whence the urgency? Why, the exchanges are supposed to go online by the end of the year, and the plaintiffs—individuals and firms in non-cooperating states—will want to plan their conduct depending on whether or not the IRS rule is good law. Which it isn’t.

Reader Discussion

Law & Liberty welcomes civil and lively discussion of its articles. Abusive comments will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to delete comments - or ban users - without notification or explanation.

on June 07, 2013 at 21:14:23 pm

I read the motion for summary judgment. When can anyone expect a response?

read full comment
Image of Jardinero1
Jardinero1

Law & Liberty welcomes civil and lively discussion of its articles. Abusive comments will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to delete comments - or ban users - without notification or explanation.

Related

Obamacare: The States’ Rights and Wrongs

Briefs have been trickling into the U.S. Supreme Court in the Obamacare cases. Soon, they’ll come flooding: briefing on the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate is starting today. It’s important to recognize that the constitutional arguments in the cases don’t always mesh easily with conservative-libertarian opposition to Obamacare’s policy—or for that matter, with their concerns over the state and trajectory of American federalism. Continue reading to learn more.