Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center

CAC Responds To Fourth Circuit Ruling In King v. Burwell

Washington, DC – On news that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued its decision today in King v. Burwell (formerly King v. Sebelius), upholding key tax subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, CAC President Doug Kendall issued the following reaction:

 

“Minutes after the D.C. Circuit ruling in Halbig v. Burwell, which would effectively gut the ACA, a unanimous three-judge panel on the Fourth Circuit came to precisely the opposite conclusion. Of the eight judges who have now considered the plaintiffs’ rather absurd challenge to the meaning of the ACA, six have decisively rejected these claims.

 

“We are confident that the en banc D.C. Circuit will follow suit in the near future.”

 

#

 

Resources:

 

*  CAC “friend of the court” brief on behalf of Senate Majority Leader Reid, House Democratic Leader Pelosi, committee chairs in office when the ACA was passed, plus state officials in office when the ACA was being debated: 

http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/King_v_Sebelius_CAC_Amicus_Final.pdf 

 

*  “’Kick Millions Off Health Insurance’ To Save Four People . . . Nothing?” Simon Lazarus, May 28, 2014: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/2689/%E2%80%9Ckick-millions-health-insurance%E2%80%9D-save-four-people-nothing 

 

##

 

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

Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Nairne v. Landry

In Nairne v. Landry, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition on vote dilution is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s Fifteenth Amendment enforcement power.
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

United States v. Paxton

In United States v. Paxton, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Materiality Provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits states from denying the right...
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen

In Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is considering whether requiring voters to include their birthplace on voter registration forms violates the Materiality Provision of the...
Rule of Law
 

Iowa v. SEC

In Iowa v. SEC, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is considering the legality of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s new climate-related disclosure requirements.
Rule of Law
 

Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB

In Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering the legality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s update to its Examination Manual clarifying that discrimination may...
Rule of Law
 

Lackey v. Stinnie

In Lackey v. Stinnie, the Supreme Court is considering when a civil rights plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees as the “prevailing party” in a case.