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.

WE'LL BE BLUNT:

We need to start raising significantly more in donations from our online community of readers, especially from those who read Mother Jones regularly but have never decided to pitch in because you figured others always will. We also need long-time and new donors, everyone, to keep showing up for us.

In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, how brutal it is to sustain quality journalism right now, what makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there, and why support from readers is the only thing that keeps us going. Despite the challenges, we're optimistic we can increase the share of online readers who decide to donate—starting with hitting an ambitious $300,000 goal in just three weeks to make sure we can finish our fiscal year break-even in the coming months.

Please learn more about how Mother Jones works and our 47-year history of doing nonprofit journalism that you don't find elsewhere—and help us do it with a donation if you can. We've already cut expenses and hitting our online goal is critical right now.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

We need to start raising significantly more in donations from our online community of readers, especially from those who read Mother Jones regularly but have never decided to pitch in because you figured others always will. We also need long-time and new donors, everyone, to keep showing up for us.

In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, how brutal it is to sustain quality journalism right now, what makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there, and why support from readers is the only thing that keeps us going. Despite the challenges, we're optimistic we can increase the share of online readers who decide to donate—starting with hitting an ambitious $300,000 goal in just three weeks to make sure we can finish our fiscal year break-even in the coming months.

Please learn more about how Mother Jones works and our 47-year history of doing nonprofit journalism that you don't find elsewhere—and help us do it with a donation if you can. We've already cut expenses and hitting our online goal is critical right now.

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