Judge Rules Obamacare Unconstitutional, But There’s No Need To Panic

A federal judge in Texas last week ruled that the entire Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is unconstitutional because Republicans zeroed out the tax penalty for not having health insurance. The judge based his ruling on the Supreme Court ruling that had said the ACA was Constitutional because it falls within the tax code, but with no tax penalties, the judge said the whole thing can now go. People are understandably concerned, but as Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins explains, the sky is not falling and the judge used faulty reasoning that will almost definitely get overturned.

Become a member today!

Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!

Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!

Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel

Be sociable! Follow us on:

Follow more of our stories at

Subscribe to our podcast

*This transcript was generate d by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

On Friday, a judge in Texas, a federal judge appointed by .George W Bush way back in the day, struck down the entire affordable care act saying that everything about this legislation is now unconstitutional, and I say now unconstitutional because that plays a big part in the ruling which I will get to and dissect and completely debunk in just a moment, but first and foremost, obviously people started freaking out when this happened. You know, we've got 20 million people in the United States who stand to lose their health insurance if this law is struck down and done away with. So those people have absolutely every right to be concerned. Every American has a right to be concerned right now, but I promise you it's not as bad as you think the sky is. In fact, not falling after this one corporate as hack Republican judge made this horrible ruling. So let's get into the ruling.

Technically, this ruling actually starts with a ruling from the US Supreme Court back in 2012 when they ruled that yes, the affordable care act is constitutional because Congress has the authority to find people through the tax code. It is part of Congress's tax powers and therefore this legislation is constitutional. They have the authority to do that. Last year when the Republicans passed their tax cut package, they zeroed out the tax penalty for not having health insurance. And that phrase is important. They zeroed out and it's that phrase alone that this judge in Texas now said, you know what, there's no tax penalty anymore, so it's not. Congress is tax power. So therefore the whole thing is unconstitutional. If I'm basing my ruling on what the Supreme Court said was constitutional about it, that piece is no longer there. So it's unconstitutional. The problem is that this judge is going to face and every other quarter along the way, it's probably going to strike down his ruling because he's a moron.

Uh, the tax is still there. It's still a part of the tax code. It's just that it's zeroed out. So the tax penalty that you pay for not having health insurance is $0, but you still have to tell them you don't have insurance. And then they assess a $0 penalty on you. What this judge failed to do in the ruling, and this is why it will be struck down by every other court because his reasoning was unsound. He didn't count zero as a number and yes it is. If it is still in the tax code, which it is because they didn't repeal that part of the law and destroy it, they just reduced the penalty to zero. The penalty still exists, therefore it is still a part of the tax powers of Congress and therefore by the Supreme Court's own ruling still constitutional judges later on the appellate line going to have to determine whether or not they consider zero to be a number and it is in terms of a fine because think about it this way.