�Թϲ�����

“How many times do we have to go through this?” That’s what Kathy Tomasic wants to know. Painstakingly, she has planned her life — and that of her teenage son, who has a rare genetic disorder — around access to health care. She did so based on a specific set of assumptions about what kinds of insurance would be available to her family, under what conditions and for how many years. (Catherine Rampell, 12/17)

The words “Obamacare” and “unconstitutional” in quick succession made for scary weekend reading in the health-care community, and that fear played out in a market rout on Monday — the first chance shareholders had to react to a Texas judge’s decision late last week to strike down the law. But a massive sell-off arguably isn’t warranted. Uncertainty is unpleasant, but the Affordable Care Act isn’t going away any time soon, and most likely isn’t going anywhere at all. (Max Nisen, 12/17)

Now that a Texas judge has ruled that the entire Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional — all because of its individual mandate — Republicans may find themselves wishing for a different outcome.The big picture: There is little hope of a deal with Democrats on health reform in a divided Congress if the decision is upheld. Democrats will now use the 2020 campaign to paint Republicans as threatening a host of popular provisions in the ACA. And here’s the kicker: protections for pre-existing conditions, the provision that played such a big role in the midterms, is not even the most popular one. (Drew Altman, 12/18)

Last week’s ruling by a federal judge in Texas that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional may yet be reversed on appeal. But that shouldn’t let Republicans off the hook for endangering the health care of millions of Americans, especially those with pre-existing medical conditions.President Donald Trump, Sen.-elect Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and other Republicans have insisted they won’t abandon those people. They now have an obligation to explain how they intend to replace their coverage if this flawed ruling survives. (12/17)

Can you recall a case in which a political party united to bring a lawsuit demanding that a law they bitterly opposed for the better part of a decade be struck down, they won a ruling in their favor, and then not only didn’t they celebrate, but they seemed to desperately hope no one would notice? That’s what’s happening right now. Some months ago, Republicans filed a lawsuit demanding that the entire Affordable Care Act be struck down on some ludicrously tendentious grounds; the lawsuit was supported by 20 Republican-controlled states and the Trump administration. (Paul Waldman, 12/17)

Thanks to President Donald Trump’s slashes to the federal government’s Affordable Care Act advertising budget and his administration’s “sabotage” of "Obamacare," hundreds of thousands of clueless people have been left in the dark and aren’t enrolling in Obamacare—at least, that’s what countless reporters and pundits would have you believe. However, the truth is this issue is far more complex that what many on the Left suggest. (Justin Haskins, 12/17)

When federal Judge Reed O’Connor effectively struck down the Affordable Care Act on Friday, there was a chorus of shock and dismay across the country from politicians and pundits alike. However, the decision is in many ways a bill come due for a number of key players in the ACA’s history. Not the least of them is Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts saved the ACA in 2012 by defining a key provision as a tax. That tax is now gone and, with it, Roberts’ very narrow rationale for preserving the original health care scheme. (Jonathan Turley, 12/17)

A federal judge in Texas struck down the Affordable Care Act on Friday, but it’s not the end of the line for the crucial, long-beleaguered health insurance program. The judge, Reed O’Connor, did not rule that the law must be enjoined immediately. That effectively means the Affordable Care Act can proceed as usual while the latest legal challenge works its way through the appeals courts. (12/17)