world

'Obamacare' survives: Supreme Court dismisses big challenge

43 Comments
By MARK SHERMAN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


43 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Republicans don’t seem to have much enthusiasm for continuing to try to overturn the law.

Because it's overwhelmingly popular. Also, the Supreme Court should not legislate. Those unhappy with the law should bring it up with the legislators.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Just dying to hear the rightists on JT calling Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh far left radical socialists. I’m sure Trump already has. This case was his baby too.

I’m not a fan of the conservative justices on the SC, but it’s heartening to know that most of them can recognize nonsense when it comes before them.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It wasn’t even close. Another fever-dream of the GOP.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

7-2. “Root and branch” was it? Seems Obamacare is overwhelmingly popular.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

I'm astounded that the Supreme Court didn't throw out the law and replace it with the alternative that the Republicans put forward.

I mean, the replacement the Republicans put forward was supposed to be better, while costing less, and insuring more people. It's clearly better, so why is America not enacting it? I've been away from the right-wing bubbles recently, with the exception of the occasional visit to foxnews.com, so can someone tell me why the Democrats are so opposed to the Republican health care plan?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

When will Republicans do do something constructive? Even the conservative Supremes majority crushed this one.

This anti-citizen and -human attitude is such a time and energy waster. 

We are going to see Trump's plan in two weeks.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Doesn't anyone else think the supreme court justices that Trump planted should be removed for daring to go against Trump's and the Democrat's wishes?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Doesn't anyone else think the supreme court justices that Trump planted should be removed for daring to go against Trump's and the Democrat's wishes?

You’ll have to wait for the Trump conservatives to start posting before you get agreement on this.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

I personally think the Republicans should try to launch more court challenges to this case, like they did the last election. They'll eventually be able to overturn both through the courts. And it's only 2 months until Trump is reinstated.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Trump promised to defeat Obamacare and replace it with his own healthcare. He failed in both.

Universal Healthcare is needed.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Trump promised to defeat Obamacare and replace it with his own healthcare. He failed in both.

To be fair, who knew healthcare was so complicated?

I mean, other than literally everyone, especially every competent president ever?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I think it’s ok for the people that can’t afford it or don’t have options or access to healthcare, good for them, it’s better than nothing. I could care less as long as the Federal government doesn’t touch my private health insurance plan and all the benefits that come with it, I’m ok

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

I think it’s ok for the people that can’t afford it or don’t have options or access to healthcare, good for them, it’s better than nothing.

You're tweeting a different twong than when you called Obamacare "the worst thing to happen to Americans in American history".

You also said Trump was going to lose. Then that he was going to win. Of course you were right the second time, as we all know he's been frauded out of the presidency and will be reinstated in August.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

I think it’s ok for the people that can’t afford it or don’t have options or access to healthcare, good for them, it’s better than nothing.

You think something people can’t afford is good for them?

I could care less as long as the Federal government doesn’t touch my private health insurance plan and all the benefits that come with it, I’m ok

If you could care less, why don’t you?

It’s comical you live in Japan but claim to have private health insurance that works here and in the US.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Why would someone have private American health insurance if they don't live there?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The basic premise of the suit was utterly vapid. GOP didn’t like the penalty on those who didn’t have health in.

So the penalty was reduced to zero. Great, right?

Oh no. Because the penalty is zero, it’s not a tax anymore. So the entire law is unconstitutional. No, that was actually the case.

The Texas AG who filed the case was found to have no standing meaning he suffered no damages and this had no right to bring a case.

Just laughable.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

a “massive government takeover of health care.”

You could say that about pretty much anything these days.

Better ways will be found when government finances hit the wall.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Better ways will be found when government finances hit the wall.

Better ways. Lol us Americans have seen the private sectors "better ways." It resulted in raising costs well in excessive of any other sector. It resulted in healthcare costs far more expensive than just about any other developed country, and worse healthcare outcomes.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

So much for Mitch’s “root and branch” approach.

The GOP could have made overturning Obamacare a central part of its convention. It wasn’t mentioned once in 3 days. Why? Because actually throwing 20 million people off their affordable care would have been an act of political suicide. And he knows it.

A majority of Americans support the law and would punish politicians who voted to overturn the law. So GOP officials tried to punt it to the courts hoping to overturn it without taking any risk. So much for Justices shouldn’t legislate, eh?

Chief Justice Roberts said “Mitch, please.”

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Better ways. Lol us Americans have seen the private sectors "better ways." It resulted in raising costs well in excessive of any other sector. It resulted in healthcare costs far more expensive than just about any other developed country, and worse healthcare outcomes.

How else are corporations expected to attract top-level talent if they don’t pay their CEOs ridiculous sums of money?!

4 ( +6 / -2 )

How else are corporations expected to attract top-level talent if they don’t pay their CEOs ridiculous sums of money?!

Lol I know you jest, but that is a major problem. Management professionals have been quite successful in creating a market for their skills.

Private insurance also makes little sense, it's just an added cost.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

At least some common sense in court, sorry republican museum, another one that you lose, this republican museum never do something constructive, only want to destry the little good that people have for the benefit of your greedy millionaire donors.. You are the most loser of United States and what hurts you the most is that the health system has the name OBAMA !!..

Fine and nice people love Obama...

Obama !!, Obama !!, la la,laaaaa !!!! lol !!

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Why does the GOP hate health care so much? It's like they actively want people to die. Sad.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Lol us Americans have seen the private sectors "better ways."

No offense to y’all Americans, but there are health systems in this world that cost far less in terms of GDP and produce better or equivalent health outcomes to the US and UK and other places.

Expecting the two party US political system of big-government leftists and conservative rightists to figure out how to reform towards such a system is pretty much out of the question though.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Another example is Singapore, which uses compulsory savings accounts and currently spends just 4.8 percent of GDP on health and long‐​term care, compared with 17.2 percent in the United States and 9.5 percent in New Zealand, and yet maintains one of the highest quality services in the world.

https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/winter-2018/welfare-savings-not-taxation

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Whatever one thinks Obama politically, his healthcare program never made any economic sense.

The medical benefit packages and the cost of implementation far outstrips the costs of private medical insurance. Many of the Private plans closed..

The stipulation, administrative expenses be capped at a predetermined fraction of expenditure. .

Insured people were forced out of private plans into public plans, all heavily subsidized.

Leading to healthy people delayed joining the schemes until having a need of expensive medical service.

All at a huge cost to the tax payers.

This maybe out of date. I understand the healthcare program has gone through a number of changes.

One of the problems with Universal Health Care, can be experienced and assessed by reviewing the UK NHS.

The service is appallingly managed . It is frankly shocking.

Layer upon layer of middle management, An internal market, denying Clinical care,

Health care trusts with crippling cost, though management teams poorly suited for the basic tasks at hand.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

No "standing". they didnt actually look into the issue itself. where have we seen that before?

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the court that the states and people who filed a federal lawsuit “have failed to show that they have standing to attack as unconstitutional the Act’s minimum essential coverage provision.”

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

You're tweeting a different twong than when you called Obamacare "the worst thing to happen to Americans in American history".

Yes, that’s correct, I still do, but if people want it and are happy with it and can’t afford anything better it’s better than nothing.

You think something people can’t afford is good for them?

I think if you can afford the best, you should get the best especially when it comes to healthcare, big government in the US can never provide that.

If you could care less, why don’t you?

I don’t care, I’m just commenting.

It’s comical you live in Japan but claim to have private health insurance that works here and in the US.

It’s actually not, I enjoy my own healthcare coverage and I’ll say it once again, if you can afford the best, why not?

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

I knew there was something going on. "no standing".

Of course worded in a much more tricky way so that it doesnt make the headline. When a Supreme Court justice calls a legitimate case an "attack"- the partisan radar goes off.

*states and people who filed a federal lawsuit “have failed to show that they have standing to attack as unconstitutional *

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Expecting the two party US political system of big-government leftists and conservative rightists to figure out how to reform towards such a system is pretty much out of the question though.

As is expecting the private sector to do so.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I knew there was something going on. "no standing".

Does this legal doctrine offend you?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

yes it does. As dishonest people use it to claim that the issue itself was found legal or not legal.

Seems like a total dodge in order to avoid addressing the actual issue. People dont have "standing", neither do states, neither does the President. So WHO has "standing". and if someone did have standing, what would the verdict have been? total dodge.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Yes, that’s correct, I still do, but if people want it and are happy with it and can’t afford anything better it’s better than nothing.

How could people afford something better than Obamacare compliant insure an extra when you’ve repeatedly told us how outrageously expensive it is?

It’s actually not, I enjoy my own healthcare coverage and I’ll say it once again, if you can afford the best, why not?

Why don’t you help the rest of us American expats out and tell us which health insurance company allows use in both Japan and the US? You know, so we can have the best and not worry about going bankrupt if we get injured while visiting the States?

This is informative:

If you live in Japan, you are required to have some form of public health insurance. There are two types of health insurance in Japan: Employees Health Insurance (kenko hoken) offered to employees working at companies and factories and National Health Insurance (kokumin kenko hoken) for self-employed or unemployed people.

https://www.mofa.go.jp/j_info/visit/visa/pdfs/guide_living_en.pdf

6 ( +7 / -1 )

No "standing". they didnt actually look into the issue itself. 

You obviously do not know what "no standing" means in a court of law, or how law works in general.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

ACA is great.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

How could people afford something better than Obamacare

Because I have money

Why don’t you help the rest of us American expats

I love our veterans and definitely do what I can.

This is informative:

If you live in Japan, you are required to have some form of public health insurance. There are two types of health insurance in Japan: Employees Health Insurance (kenko hoken) offered to employees working at companies and factories and National Health Insurance (kokumin kenko hoken) for self-employed or unemployed people.

I know how the system works, but thanks anyway.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

> yes it does. As dishonest people use it to claim that the issue itself was found legal or not legal.

Seems like a total dodge in order to avoid addressing the actual issue. People dont have "standing", neither do states, neither does the President. So WHO has "standing". and if someone did have standing, what would the verdict have been? total dodge.

Good thing you don’t claim to be a lawyer.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Blacklabel: neither does the President. So WHO has "standing". and if someone did have standing, what would the verdict have been? total dodge.

Can you go into more detail about this? Sounds like if the GOP can find anyone with "standing" they would win?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

bass: I think it’s ok for the people that can’t afford it or don’t have options or access to healthcare, good for them, it’s better than nothing. I could care less as long as the Federal government doesn’t touch my private health insurance plan and all the benefits that come with it, I’m ok

So what did Obamacare change for you?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Obamacare is the worst. Medical costs have gone through the roof and service is horrible.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

No offense to y’all Americans, but there are health systems in this world that cost far less in terms of GDP and produce better or equivalent health outcomes to the US and UK and other places.

I am well aware there are better systems outside the US.

big-government leftists and conservative rightists to figure out how to reform towards such a system is pretty much out of the question though.

Not a whole lot of disagreement until the latter part of your post; it sounds a bit too "both sides" for my liking, and both sides aren't equally to blame. Republicans refused to cooperate in creating ACA, which was actually a conservative scheme.

Lastly, about Singapore: it seems they have a well-run HC system, but the government plays a large part in creating that system. 70% of Singaporeans get healthcare insurance through a government program. The system is also funded through a mandatory savings system, which Republicans roundly reject.

@Black:

yes it does. As dishonest people use it to claim that the issue itself was found legal or not legal.

Why have no people with standing come forward? Hint: there is no one with standing.

"Standing" isn't some weak "cop out," as you'd like to believe. It is essential in bringing a suit. Let me try to explain through an analogy:

Let's imagine I am hit and killed by a drunk driver. You, only knowing me through this site then sue the person who hit me for damages. Would that claim go through? No, because you have no standing. You cannot demonstrate you've been impacted.

In the exact same way, the lawsuit was rejected by SCOTUS.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Health Care generally is finding a funding solution to the tax payer, that represents a balanced, embodies smart provision.

I have been told tales of US friends and colleges losing there company healthcare insurance schemes? Primarily because they did not comply with ACA regulations.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

And with a Supreme Court that includes three appointees of former President Donald Trump, opponents of “Obamacare” hoped a majority of the justices would finally kill the law they have been fighting for more than a decade.

This has partially restored my faith in the Court and it's a step in the right direction (pardon the pun) for America and greatly helps a large number of Americans.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites