Oklahoma Federal Court Rules IRS Attempt to Save Obamacare's Subsidies for Federal Exchange Enrollees "Arbitrary, Capricious, an Abuse of Discretion,

[Draggingtree]

Ace of Spades:

September 30, 2014

Oklahoma Federal Court Rules IRS Attempt to Save Obamacare's Subsidies for Federal Exchange Enrollees "Arbitrary, Capricious, an Abuse of Discretion, and Otherwise Not In Accordance with the Law"

The full decision is here.

 

If you're coming in late to this, or have forgotten, this concerns the IRS granting those who enroll into Obamacare in the federal exchanges the same subsidies as are granted to those who enroll in the state exchanges.

 

The problem is that the law only specifies subsidies for stateexchange enrollees. It appears this was intended to be an encouragement for states to set up their exchanges.

 

But 26 or so states opted out

 

[Draggingtree]

Oklahoma district court rejects IRS tax credit rule

A federal district court in Oklahoma endorses Halbig v. Burwell and concludes the PPACA only authorizes tax credits for the purchase of insurance in exchanges "established by the State."

By Jonathan H. Adler |

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/09/30/oklahoma-district-court-rejects-irs-tax-credit-rule/

[Draggingtree]

Oklahoma judge rules against Obamacare

BY KELLY COHEN | 09/30/14 03:18 PM

Another federal judge has ruled to narrow subsidies to buy health insurance under Obamacare, making it more likely the U.S. Supreme Court will take up a case championed by conservatives.

Read More...

http://washingtonexaminer.com/oklahoma-judge-rules-against-obamacare/article/2554172

[SrWoodchuck]

Yay.

[Draggingtree]

10/2/2014

Federal Judge Rules Similar to Halbig Court, Slaps Down Partisan Judges to Contrary

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:34 am

I like a well-reasoned opinion, but I love one that includes a smackdown of lefty hack judges.

 

The decision comes to us via Gabe Malor at Hot Air, and can be read here (.pdf). Basically, as Gabe explains: “Like the now-vacated decision in Halbig, the judge in Pruitt could not find any statutory authority for IRS to offer tax subsidies to individuals that purchased insurance on the federal exchanges.” The judge also had some pointed words for lefty judges who had taken a contrary position:

 

Other judges in similar litigation have cast the plaintiffs’ argument in apocalyptic language. The first sentence of Judge Edwards’ dissent in Halbig is as follows: “This case is about Appellants’ not-so-veiled attempt to gut the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (‘ACA’).” Concurring in King, Judge Davis states that “[a]ppellants’ approach would effectively destroy the statute . . . .” Further, “[w]hat [appellants] may not do is rely on our help to deny to millions of Americans desperately-needed health insurance. . .” Id.

 

http://patterico.com/2014/10/02/federal-judge-rules-similar-to-halbig-court-slaps-down-partisan-judges-to-contrary/