Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012), is a landmark [2] [3] [4] United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court upheld Congress's power to enact most provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly called Obamacare, [5] [6] and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA), including a requirement for most ...
Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), there have been numerous actions in federal courts to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation. [1] [2] They include challenges by states against the ACA, reactions from legal experts with respect to its constitutionality, several federal court rulings on the ACA's constitutionality, the final ruling on the constitutionality of the ...
California v. Texas, 593 U.S. 659 (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the constitutionality of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA), colloquially known as Obamacare. It was the third such challenge to the ACA seen by the Supreme Court since its enactment.
The Supreme Court heard arguments in a Republican challenge to the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act Tuesday, and while we won’t know the court’s ruling until next spring, most ...
With the presidential election looming as well as a Supreme Court hearing on the Affordable Care Act, BondCliq CEO Chris White joins Yahoo Finance to discuss how the debt of healthcare companies ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Burwell, 576 U.S. 473 (2015), was a 6–3 decision by the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Court's decision upheld, as consistent with the statute, the outlay of premium tax credits to qualifying persons in all states, both those with exchanges established ...
The Supreme Court reversed this ruling in the consolidated case, Maine Community Health Options v. United States , reaffirming as with Judge Wheeler that the government had a responsibility to pay those funds under the ACA and the use of riders to de-obligate its from those payments was illegal.