Another Obamacare Lawsuit

Back in 2012 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius. At the time, the high court addressed the constitutionality of the ACA’s “individual mandate.” According to a new report in World Net Daily, by Bob Unruh (online, 5/26) “Although it did not address standing, by reaching a decision, it implicitly affirmed the court of appeals’ analysis. In that case, the court of appeals held that private parties challenging the constitutionality of the ACA’s ‘individual mandate’ had standing to pursue their claims based on their need to incur anticipatory compliance costs.”

Approximately three years ago, the high court also found that penalties inherent in the Affordable Care Act were taxes, and are thus not unconstitutional.

A new case has been filed on behalf of Larry Kawa, and his company, Kawa Orthodontics. It is an appeal of an 11th Federal Circuit decision. As Unruh’s World Bet Daily account explains,  “Judicial Watch, in announcing the appeal, said, the question, therefore is whether “an entity that loses the value of the substantial time and resources it prematurely expanded at the time value of the money it spent on anticipatory compliance costs is sufficiently injured to confer Article III standing.”

Kawa’s suit is not over the “text” of the healthcare law, nor is it questioning enforcement of its “employer mandate provisions,” but rather over the Obama administration’s choice to delay enforcement of the employer mandate for at least 24 months.

Read more at World Net Daily