Key Members of Congress Who Passed Obamacare Tell Court: Cost-Sharing Reduction Payments Are Lawful and Critical to Effective Operation of ACA

“Congress provided funding for them in the same permanent appropriation that funds the law’s premium tax credits.”

Washington, DC – Following President Trump’s decision to stop making critical cost-sharing reduction payments to health insurance companies, 18 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit in federal district court, asking a judge to compel those payments as required by the Affordable Care Act. Constitutional Accountability Center – which represents leading Members of Congress who helped enact the ACA in filing a friend of the court brief in support of the states – issued the following statement:  

“President Trump has taken a flawed legal position,” said CAC President Elizabeth Wydra, “in his effort to sabotage the Affordable Care Act – a decision that could harm millions of Americans and also blow a nearly $200 billion hole in the deficit over a decade. None of this is necessary. As Members of Congress responsible for enacting the Affordable Care Act know better than anyone, Obamacare without doubt provides funding for these cost-sharing reduction payments.”
 
“These payments are essential to how the ACA was designed to operate,” continued CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod, “and that’s why Congress drafted the ACA to fund them out of the same permanent appropriation that funds the tax credits that low and middle-income buyers get directly when they buy health insurance on the exchanges. President Trump’s needless, harmful decision violates the law, and the courts should require the Administration to make these payments.”

#

Resources:

Brief of Members of Congress in State of California, et al. v. Trump: https://www.theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/California-v-Trump-Amicus.pdf

##

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

###

More from

Rule of Law
July 25, 2024

USA: ‘The framers of the constitution envisioned an accountable president, not a king above the law’

CIVICUS
CIVICUS discusses the recent US Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity and its potential impact...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Access to Justice
July 23, 2024

Bissonnette and the Future of Federal Arbitration

The Regulatory Review
Every year, there are a handful of Supreme Court cases that do not make headlines...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
July 19, 2024

US Supreme Court is making it harder to sue – even for conservatives

Reuters
July 19 (Reuters) - Over its past two terms, the U.S. Supreme Court has put an end...
By: David H. Gans, Andrew Chung
Rule of Law
July 18, 2024

RELEASE: Sixth Circuit Panel Grapples with Effect of Supreme Court’s Loper Bright Decision on Title X Regulation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
July 17, 2024

Family Planning Fight Poised to Test Scope of Chevron Rollback

Bloomberg Law
Justices made clear prior Chevron-based decisions would stand Interpretations of ambiguous laws no longer given deference...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Mary Anne Pazanowski
Rule of Law
July 15, 2024

Not Above the Law Coalition On Judge Cannon Inappropriately Dismissing Classified Documents Case Against Trump

WASHINGTON — Today, following reports that Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the classified documents case against...
By: Praveen Fernandes