ACA Defenders Push Again for Expedited Appeal

Interveners want U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor to clarify his December 14 ruling that the Affordable Care Act was unconsitutional, and they want him to certify the ruling so they can appeal it immediately.

Attorneys general from 17 states who've intervened in defense of the Affordable Care Act are again asking a federal judge who ruled the law was unconstitutional to expedite an appeal by January 1.

The interveners, all Democrats, led by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, argue that U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor's December 14 ruling in Texas v. U.S. that the ACA was unconstitutional "lacked clarity."

Their motion is similar to a request filed on December 17, which also asked O'Connor to certify the opinion so that it can be appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals immediately.

The suit challenging the constitutionality of the ACA was filed by Republican state leaders in 20 states, who had successfully argued that the entire law was rendered invalid by Congress zeroing out the penalty tied to its individual mandate.

The Democratic AGs want O'Connor to clarify before January 1 that the ACA remains the law of the land during the appeals process. Ending the ACA, the interveners say, would cause incalculable harm to the U.S. healthcare system, states that rely on Medicaid expansion funding, and millions of Americans.  

"It's hard to imagine a world in which millions of Americans could lose healthcare, but these are the stakes right now in federal court," Becerra said in prepared remarks.

"Every American could be affected by this case's outcome: children, seniors, workers covered by employers or through the Marketplace, and the hundreds of millions of people with a pre-existing condition," Becerra said. "This shouldn't be a debate: the ACA is the law of the land, and we will continue to challenge this dangerous attempt to undermine Americans' health."

Here's the timeline on the various motions filed since the December 14 ruling:

On December 17, the 17 Democratic AGs first filed for an expedited motion to clarify the status quo of the ACA and ask O'Connor to grant an immediate stay on his ruling, or to certify it so that it could be appeal immediately.

On December 18, O'Connor issued an order, requesting the federal government and plaintiff states respond to the request filed by the Democratic AGs, and additionally weigh in on whether they believe the court needs to resolve any pending claims that were not addressed in the December 14 ruling. The plaintiffs and the federal government were ordered to reply by December 21. The Democratic AGs were to respond by December 26.

On December 21, The Trump Administration and Republican AGs agreed that O'Connor's December 14 decision does not change the status quo of the ACA. They also agreed that O'Connor should certify his decision for appeal and issue a stay of proceedings pending appeal.

However, because O'Connor's decision was not final, the Trump Administration said it would ask the judge to clarify his decision and confirm that it doesn't require immediate compliance. The Republican plaintiffs said they won't enforce O'Connor's decision while the case is on appeal. 

On December 26, the Democratic AGs reiterated their call for clarity in an expedited and certified ruling.