Supreme Court upholds Affordable Care Act
Author
Upcoming Events
Related News
Key Takeaways
On June 17, the United States Supreme Court dismissed a case challenging the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by a vote of 7-2. California v. Texas considered whether the individual mandate became unconstitutional when it was repealed in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and, if so, whether it can be severed from the rest of the ACA. While the Court did not address these underlying questions, the justices ruled that the plaintiffs in the case – led by Texas – did not have standing to sue.
The ACA’s individual mandate required individuals to obtain health insurance or face a tax penalty. However, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 effectively repealed the individual mandate, reducing the tax penalty from $695 to $0. This shift led to a challenge from the state of Texas and others who argued that because the mandate was set to zero, it could no longer be considered a tax and was therefore unconstitutional. The plaintiffs further argued that if the individual mandate was unconstitutional, the rest of the ACA was. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that Texas and its partners did not have the standing to bring the lawsuit forward, effectively upholding the legal grounds for the law for the third time since its passage in 2010.
County governments are key administrators of the health care safety net and are often providers of last resort for vulnerable populations who gain access to coverage under the ACA. The ACA strengthens the federal, state and local partnership for the Medicaid program and provides states with the option to expand coverage to low-income adults without children. Medicaid expansion also helps counties deliver better care for justice-involved individuals, qualifying them for access to necessary treatment and reducing the risk of recidivism. NACo will continue to work with Congress and the administration to implement and advocate for improvements to the ACA that allow counties to meet the health needs of their residents best.
Additional Resources
Resource
Medicaid and Counties: Understanding the Program and Why It Matters to Counties
Related News
NACo Legal Advocacy: Suncor Energy v. Boulder County
NACo joined a Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that federal law should not prevent counties from pursuing state-law claims to recover costs associated with local harms.
NACo Legal Advocacy: Jouppi v. Alaska
On July 20, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Jouppi v. Alaska (25-246), a case that could affect how state and local governments impose and defend fines and property forfeitures under the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause.
NACo Legal Advocacy: St. Mary’s Catholic Parish v. Roy
The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding how easily a challenger can move a neutral local rule out of deferential review and into the most demanding standard in Constitutional law.