If a Repuke SCOTUS overthrows ACA, would it take place immediately?

[MoonRiver]

Or would there be time for everyone to adjust? Asking because if it gives US some time Biden might already be sworn in and we have the Senate. Hopefully Biden and congressional Dems could then pass a bill supporting health care for all.

[Yeehah]

1. Yep, right away.

No appeal from the USSC.

[Demsrule86]

4. It won't be decided until the spring which gives us time to change the ACA and add a public option.

All is not lost.

[subterranean]

8. But that will only be possible if we win control of the Senate.

If the Republicans still control it, McConnell could block the Senate from even voting on the necessary changes, or force concessions in exchange. That's another possible scenario. Hopefully it won't come to that.

[Demsrule86]

22. If we don't take the Senate, health care is gone...another gift from 2016 Greens ....fuck them.

[LizBeth]

11. I understand there is a case Nov 10.

[Ms. Toad]

15. It will likely be one of the last cases announced -

Meaning late June, early July.

Big cases generally take a long time to decide and write.

[LizBeth]

17. Thank you. Drunken Irishman explained it down thread. I was told late spring which was comforting,

then people were telling me about the Nov 10 which had me worried but I figured it would take time, just hoping Biden was in to implement something else. Then this thread saying immediate canceling so scared again. I appreciate the two of you guys sharing the information.

Kinda life and death for some of us.

[Demsrule86]

2. Biden will be sworn in ...they won't hear arguments until after the election and will rule in the

spring. There will be time to expand the bench and/or to add the mandate back into the ACA along with a public option...thus rendering it moot since the mandate is the basis for the lawsuit.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. They are hearing arguments on Nov. 10.

That's why they want Barrett confirmed right away.

[Demsrule86]

23. That is correct and said after the election. However, the ruling won't come down for months...

sometime from spring to July. If Biden wins and we get the Senate, we will be OK.

[Statistical]

3. It really depends a lot on the exact ruling.

Exactly what is unconstitutional and why. However yes as a general rule of thumb rulings can take effect immediately.

To be clear private insurance is a contract between the insurer and the insured. The ACA mandated such contracts had to cover pre-existing conditions. Contracts that didn't were unlawful. If the SCOTUS takes that away then what happens for an individual policyholder will depend literally on the words on the contract that covers exactly how and when the contract can be modified and under what conditions. That could vary from insurer to insurer and even policy to policy.

However if the pre-existing condition requirement is struck down then at best the renewal contract (and any new contracts by newly insured) wouldn't cover pre-existing conditions. At worst you would lose coverage nearly instantly if the contract has provisions which allow it to be amended before renewal. It is going to be a mess. Hopefully that galvanizes support for single payer.

[getagrip_already]

6. also depends if....

the ruling is narrowly focused to the federal aca, or if they go broadly and rule that state's cannot have similar provisions.

Right now, in MA, if only aca were to fall, we would still be protected by state law. But if their ruling was broad, it would nullify even state laws protecting policy holders.

That would be a cf of epic proportions.

[Statistical]

7. +1 Yeah that is another important point.

[Ms. Toad]

16. They can only rule on the issues before them

The challenge here is to a very specific law. Finding this law unconstitutional would not extend to other laws covering the same general subject matter.

[getagrip_already]

28. Ok, but the wordng can certainly spark suits in fed court challenging state laws no?

We've seen this before. A ruling in a narrow case opens the door for more and more challenges at the state level.

[Ms. Toad]

29. Only if the same issue is before the court.

Did Massachusetts have a penalty masquerading as a tax that got dumped, that was argued as critical to making its law function?

If not, there is nothing this court coudl say that would impact the Massachusetts law. It isn't deciding whether a government can set up a health care exchange with mandatory coverage and a ban on pre-existing condition.

It is deciding whether the law can stand after the removal of a component that was argued to be essential to the law.

[Demsrule86]

24. The argument is that ending the requirement to buy health insurance means the entire bill is

null and void. The mandate...as it were.

[Statistical]

25. Agreed. However the SCOTUS doesn' thave to rule that way.

They can find it narrowly unconstitutional for example and strike down just the individual mandate leaving the rest (to include pre existing conditions) standing.

They could also strike it all down saying it is impossible to decouple the mandate from the rest as written.

So it really comes down to exactly how and why they find it Unconstitutional. The exact wording of the ruling will matter a lot. That is why I was saying it is very hard to know what it means to John Doe policy holder until we get the verdict.

[Drunken Irishman]

5. They won't rule until late spring/early summer.

But yes, at that point they can strike it down and it instantly goes away. Or should theoretically. It would create a healthcare crisis and likely why Roberts sided with the liberals in 2012. But more significant is that it's now actual coverage, which wasn't the case in 2012.

My guess is this is why the ACA won't be struck down. They'll rule on the mandate and force congress to realign the law to fit their ruling.

[LizBeth]

12. I was comforted by that then was told there is a case Nov 10.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Wait...what's your point?

I'm confused by your comment. Can you please clarify what you mean by 'there is a case November 10th'?

The Supreme Court began hearing cases on October 5th. They will not rule on any case until 2021, however, beyond very unusual or timely cases (like Bush vs Gore). Regardless if they hear the ACA starting on November 10th, their ruling on it won't come until spring/summer of 2021 when their term ends.

I assume that's what you're talking about. This term starts in October and goes through June or so.

[LizBeth]

14. That is what I am talking about. Maybe you before, told me that would be spring before ruling.

Then I was told and read from others there was a case being presented to SC Nov 10 that would take down ACA. They did not clarify that it was only being heard Nov 10 and ruled on in spring. Hence, my confusion. So, you are saying they will hear the case Nov 10 and they will not rule on the case until spring. Good to know. And thank you Drunken.

[Drunken Irishman]

18. Yes. The SC will hear all their cases in their term before ruling.

Their term goes from October to June/July depending on how many cases they have. Only in very rare exceptions will they rule immediately, as was the case in Gore vs Bush as that ruling was time sensitive.

But it's not like a typical court where they'll hear the case and then rule on it. They hear all their cases for the term and rule on each case at the end of the term.

[LizBeth]

21. +1

[Demsrule86]

10. Also, adjust how? There is no adjusting to something like this.

[dsc]

19. We would likely be able to moot the case if we keep the House, win the Senate and the Presidency

by changing the law back to what it was before Trump's alteration. That would serve as a perfect test for whether to keep or ditch the filibuster. I think it should go but if moderate are saying give the GOP a chance, that would be their chance. If they filibuster that, then kill the filibuster.

[themaguffin]

20. Immediately, but don't worry, the GOP has a replacement...

right?

[fescuerescue]

26. Unlikely, but depends on how new law is written

The reason I say unlikely is because the insurance contracts that are in place today, will remain enforceable contracts until the policy expires at the end of the year.

That's when insurers will be free to discontinue coverage, continue coverage, or most likely, massively modify the terms.

[dalton99a]

27. Biden and the new Democratic Congress should get ready to nullify her ruling and make her IRRELEVANT

But first, GOTV

[roamer65]

30. Nuke the filibuster and pass Canadian-style single payor Medicare.

But first day of office, drop Medicare age to 50.