Leaky Joe? Trump's Former Counterterrorism Head Is Now Under FBI Investigation
Why Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio Could Possibly Be Relocated Soon
This Dem Senator Tried to Spew a Total Lie About Trump and Iran,...
Gen Z Is Now Using AI to Handle Tough Conversations and We're Probably...
Our New Ungracious Immigrants
'It's Time to Let Go'
Rep. Brandon Gill Got Democrats to Once Again Admit They Stand With Illegal...
Senate Committee Votes to Advance Markwayne Mullin's Nomination
Los Angeles Raised the Minimum Wage for Hotel Workers. Guess What Happened Next.
These Democrats Wouldn’t Stand for Americans—Now They’re Targets of Epic New Midterm Ad
Milwaukee Woman Sentenced to Ten Years Behind Bars for Medicaid Fraud Scheme
Here's More Cringe From the Woman in Charge of Newsom's Failed 'Butterfly Bridge'...
Even CNN Admits This About the Democrats' Opposition to the SAVE America Act
US Treasury Freezes Regime Funds As Scott Bessent Signals Growing Internal Collapse in...
As Fraud Claims Mount, Gavin Newsom Goes After the Man Exposing Them
Tipsheet

Legal Case for Individual Mandate Delay Stronger Than Employer Delay

Legal Case for Individual Mandate Delay Stronger Than Employer Delay

More than three weeks after President Obama launched HealthCare.gov, not only has it become abundantly clear that the site is a complete non-functioning catastrophe, but it is also becoming more likely that the site will not be fixed for some time.

Advertisement

Due to this failure, as Guy Benson noted yesterday, the White House is now leaving open the possibility that Obama will delay enforcing the individual mandate, probably by administrative fiat. But would such a move be legal?

If done right, yes, Obama could probably delay the indidivual mandate unilateraly. Nicholas Bagley, an assistant professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School, and Austin Frakt, a health economist with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, explain:

The secretary is explicitly empowered in yet another provision of the law to “establish a program” for determining “whether to grant a certification” for a hardship exemption. That gives Sebelius latitude to craft sensible certification rules for the exchanges.

As things stand, the rules the secretary has put in place provide for an individualized application process. But nothing in the law prevents her from tweaking that approach. If necessary, she could draft a new rule instructing nonfunctional exchanges -- including the federally operated ones -- to issue blanket certifications on behalf of all of the uninsured in their states. With those blanket certifications, the penalty would be waived -- and all without congressional action.

Advertisement

Considering how controversial the individual mandate always was (remember, Obama opposed it in the 2008 Democratic primary), it is not surprising that Democrats put an easy executive out on the mandate into the law.

The same is not true of the employer mandate which recieved far less attention in Obamacare's passage. Nothing in Obamacare gives HHS any authority to delay the employer mandate, which Obama did anyway on July 5th of this year.

Instead, Obama was forced to use an obscure passage of the U.S. tax code to justify his employer mandate.

If both of Obama's mandate delays are challenged in court, the employer mandate delay would be on much shakier legal ground.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement