Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Challenging Affordable Care Act

A lawsuit filed by the Lt. Governor of Mississippi and others has been dismissed by a Federal District Court Judge, but there was no ruling on the merits:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 3 (UPI) — A federal judge in Mississippi Thursday dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the U.S. healthcare reform law enacted in 2010.

Judge Keith Starrett of the U.S. District Court Southern District of Mississippi in Hattiesburg found state Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant and others who filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, did not have standing to file the suit. Starrett, told plaintiffs they could file an amended suit with 30 days, the Hattiesburg American reported.

It’s possible that the Amended Complaint could pass muster, but not likely given Starett’s opinion, which is reproduced below. The standing issue is one that previous lawsuits have managed to pass successfully, however there’s still the possibility that one or more of them could end up getting dismissed on appeal if the Circuit Court of Appeals finds a lack of standing to appeal.

Here’s the opinion:

Bryant v. Holder et al

FILED UNDER: Law and the Courts, Quick Takes, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Patrick T. McGuire says:

    No standing!!! Obamacare is forced on everyone (except those with a waiver) whether they want, or can afford, it or not. How the hell can they not have standing?

  2. sam says:

    “How the hell can they not have standing?”

    Perhaps if you read the opinion you can come back and tell us the judge’s reasoning.

  3. wr says:

    Perhaps if you did a little work to understand what “standing” means, instead of taking your gibberish straight from Rush’s silver spoon, you might understand.

    My heart is breaking for all the Tea Partiers here who were crowing just the other day about how “the courts” had declared “Obamacare” unconstiutional.

  4. sam says:

    Interesting, considering the Act has already been ruled constitutional. Any bets?

  5. tom p says:

    “Interesting, considering the Act has already been ruled unconstitutional. Any bets?”

    Yah, here’s one: You are a complete and total idiot with no grounding in reality ( considering the fact that it has been ruled constitutional twice)

  6. tom p says:

    Sam, you beat me to it.