Dive Brief:
- On Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued a decision not to hear a case that argues the Affordable Care Act is in violation of the Constitution’s “Origination Clause,” which specifies revenue-raising bills must originate in the House, The Hill reports.
- The lawsuit's filer was suggesting the ACA's individual mandate makes it a revenue-raising law because it fines those who remain without coverage.
- The Supreme Court declined the case without explanation, per regular procedure.
Dive Insight:
The case, Sissel v. Department of Health and Human Services, had previously been rejected by a federal appeals court, showing little promise but attracting the backing of 39 Congressional Republicans. The earlier rejection had found the origination clause did not apply because revenue-raising is not the ACA's primary purpose, just a byproduct of its effort to encourage coverage.
The court's decision not to hear the case leaves the ACA safe through the November election, as Bloomberg reports, and follows its pattern of upholding the law as it previously did against challenges in 2012 and 2015.
However, the ACA won't be at rest for long. The Supreme Court is set to hear a different challenge later this year regarding its contraceptive mandate, notes The Hill.