[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] on Monday denied a request by the Obama administration to immediately appeal an earlier ruling [opinions] that allowed a challenge to a provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) [text] to go forward. Judge Rosemary Collyer found [Washington Times report] that the House of Representatives does have legal standing to challenge the Act’s “cost sharing” provision, which allows for the use of subsidies to help those with low income afford health insurance coverage. According to the House, such a spending provision required congressional approval. According to Collyer, the question at issue was whether immediate appeal would materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation. In this case she found that it would not. Collyer did, however, deny [USA Today article] an effort by the House to sue over the administration’s delay in enforcing an ACA mandate that most large employers offer health insurance or pay a penalty. The ruling [JURIST report] the administration attempted to appeal was handed down by Collyer in September.

Comprehensive health care reform [JURIST backgrounder] was passed by Congress in March 2010, and recent legal challenges have reinvigorated debate. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) [official website] reports that between 2010 and 2015, at least 21 states enacted laws attempting to challenge or completely opt out of mandatory provisions of the ACA. In June the Supreme Court ruled [JURIST report] in King v. Burwell [SCOTUSblog materials] that tax credits available to those who buy health insurance through state exchanges are also available to those who buy it through the federal exchange. Last year the court ruled [JURIST report] in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] that closely held corporations can deny contraceptive coverage to their employees for religious reasons.