Did you think ObamaCare's days in court were over? Think again.
Today a federal judge in DC has ruled to allow a case (Halbig v. Sebelius) to move forward that challenges illegal subsidies and tax credits in the law's federally-established exchanges.
You should go to HealthCareLawsuits.org for the full story, and more updates.
Also, check out a column I just wrote about four different areas where ObamaCare faces Constitutional challenges: the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB – the Medicare cutting board), the Origination Clause (did this revenue-raising bill originate in the House?), the HHS mandate, and like today's case, an illegial IRS rule extending major provisions of ObamaCare into states that said no. From my column:
Another constitutional challenge relates to a rule issued by the IRS: State-based exchanges represent a major component of Obamacare, but 34 states chose not to establish an exchange and default to a federal exchange. Importantly, the law only provides that state-run exchanges receive federal subsidy money.
The IRS sought to “fix” this provision by writing a rule funneling federal subsidies to non-establishing states. There are now four cases, Halbig v. Sebelius, Pruitt v. Sebelius, King v. IRS, and Indiana v. IRS challenging this IRS regulation.
Later today, the same judge who ruled against the motion to dismiss Halbig will rule on the plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction.
UPDATE: This afternoon, Judge Paul Friedman ruled against the plaintiff's preliminary injunction, meaning insurance subsidies and tax credits will go forward (even in states that opted out of creating an exchange) while the case is decided on the merits. Read more here.