BREAKING: Lawsuit That Could Kill Obamacare to Be Decided Within Days

BREAKING: Lawsuit That Could Kill Obamacare to Be Decided Within Days

Obamacare was the president’s first big progressive project, and ever since its roll out it’s been nothing but trouble.
Aside from the massive headaches people have received from trying to sign up on the problem plagued website, millions of people who were promised they could keep their coverage soon discovered that wasn’t true.
On top of that, many states who had their own exchanges built experienced similar problems and shut the sites down, opting to use the federal one instead.

Fortunately, there’s a chance that a lawsuit due to be decided in a matter of days could be the bullet through the heart of this atrocious socialist program.
The suit calls into question the use of the term “state” in “state exchange” as a provision in the bill says that individuals who use these exchanges instead of the federal one will have subsidies to help pay for coverage.  Since so many states don’t have an exchange, this could mean millions who signed up won’t receive subsidies and could lose coverage, causing a downward spiral.
Hot Air reports:

Remember the Halbig case? If not, catch up right now by re-reading this post from January, written after a D.C. district court judge ruled in Obama’s favor. O-Care is a famously complex law but the lawsuit that could end up demolishing it is surprisingly simple. In a nutshell, there’s a line buried deep in the statutory text that says federal subsidies for insurance premiums will be available to anyone who buys a plan on “an Exchange established by the State.”
Question: Does Healthcare.gov, the exchange built by the federal government after 34 states refused to build their own exchanges, qualify as an “Exchange established by the State”? Or do only state exchanges qualify? If it’s the latter, then millions upon millions of people who’ve signed up for O-Care through Healthcare.gov since October in the expectation that Uncle Sam will be paying part of their bill are in for a nasty surprise. The only fix that’s available (unless His Majesty tries some executive gambit, of course) is for Congress to amend the statute so that subsidies are available on the federal exchange too, but what are the odds of the House GOP agreeing to that?
If the D.C. Circuit, which is set to rule any day now on the appeal of the earlier ruling, sides with the challengers against O, consumers will be forced to either come up with the money for their premiums themselves or drop their coverage. And if most of them choose to drop coverage, leading to a mass exodus of healthy people from various insurance risk pools, suddenly the White House is facing a death-spiral problem where hiking premiums on the remaining enrollees is the only way to pay for all the sick people still in the pool. That’ll lead to more dropped coverage, which means even higher premiums, and then it’s spiralmania.
The challenge was initially written off by some as a fool’s errand because there’s a lack of evidence that the Democrats who crafted and passed the Affordable Care Act intended to block subsidies on the federal exchange, which was designed as a backstop on behalf of the states. (They’ve signed a brief saying as much.) But the challengers seized on an ambiguity in the language of the statute which says the subsidies are to be provided by “an Exchange established by the State.”
“If the legislation is just stupid, I don’t see that it’s up to the court to save it,” Judge A. Raymond Randolph said during oral arguments in March.
Randolph, a George H.W. Bush appointee, said the text of the statute “seems perfectly clear on its face” that the subsidies are confined to state-run exchanges. Carter-appointed Judge Harry T. Edwards slammed the challengers’ claims as “preposterous.” So the deciding vote appears to be with George W. Bush-appointed Judge Thomas B. Griffith, who wasn’t resolute but sounded unconvinced of the Obama administration’s defense, saying it had a “special burden” to show that the language “doesn’t mean what it appears to mean.”

This is huge. If the court rules that the term “state” is a reference to an exchange created by individual states, it could spell the end of Obamacare.
Obamacare is a disaster of epic proportions and any action that can stop it or at least slow it down is needed to prevent the horrendous side effects of such a monstrous piece of legislation from hitting the American people.

Please share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you support this new lawsuit and it’s possible destruction of Obamacare.