Biggest News aggregator with 200 million news articles | com

Have the legal right to challenge the law. Moments ago former president obama tweeted out a statement that reads, today the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care act again. This ruling reaffirms what we have long known to be true, the Affordable Care act is here to say. The principle of universal coverage has been established and 31 Million People now have access to care through the law we passed with millions more who can no longer be denied coverage or charge more because of a preexisting condition. Also decided today, a local religious freedom case. Justices ruled in favorite of Catholic Foster Care Agency in philadelphia that refused to consider samesex couples as foster parents. Joining us to talk about this, cnn justice correspondent Jessica Schneider and White House Correspondent jeremy diamond. Jessica, on the obama care decision, what more do we know about how the decision was made . These seven justices essentially ruled on procedural grounds without getting to the heart of the issue, but the effect is the same, that the Affordable Care act will remain in place. Its the third time the Supreme Court has upheld the law since the laws inception. What happened is the three liberal justices joined with four of the conservative justices to say the plaintiffs in this case who were 18 different republicanled states plus two individuals, they just didnt have the real right or legal standing or legal injury to bring this case in the first place. They said the fact that congress had zeroed out the penalty for not buying insurance, making it zero dollars, that effectively meant that the federal government couldnt even enforce its provisions. Therefore, there was no harm to these states or the individuals. The Supreme Court essentially tossing it out on that ground, and the practical effect here is that the Affordable Care act stands. In the dissent, Justice Alito was joined by gorsuch, and he wrote and showed his exasperation that the Supreme Court had yet again found a way to uphold the law. I think he wrote, they initiated yet another improbable rescue of the act. In fact, the seven justices here deciding that because these plaintiffs had no standing, that the Affordable Care act should stand and remain the law and, of course, protect millions of americans who have gained coverage under the law. Jeremy, lets come to you at the white house. We know that President Biden was heavily involved in the original passage of obamacare. What is the white house saying today . 11 years ago when then vice President Biden leaned over to president obama as he was about to sign the Affordable Care act, saying it was a big fing deal. It was a hot mic moment. He says its here to stay. That is certainly the message from the white house, that its here to stay and they plan on continuing to improve upon it to give millions more americans access to Affordable Health care. The president says, quote, todays Supreme Court decision is a major victory for all americans benefiting from this groundbreaking and lifechanging law, and after more than a decade of attacks on the law, todays decision, the third major challenge to the law that the u. S. Supreme court has rejected, its time to move forward and keep building on this landmark law. Its important to look at what this day would have been like here at the white house had the Supreme Court ruled the other way. You would have seen 21 millionplus americans lose let Insurance Coverage and the white house scrambling to patch that up. The white house is grateful, other than from the Practical Impacts on peoples lives, they have a lot on their plate already including this Infrastructure Deal in the works, Voting Rights legislation, Police Reform legislation. Theyre glad to not have this added to their plate. Jessica, tell us about the other big decision, the one from philadelphia. Does this set a precedent for other religious freedom challenges . Whats interesting, alison, this was a june announce decision, and the reason was because it does come under very narrow circumstances. In this particular case, all the justices agreed that philadelphia violated the First Amendment rights of this Catholic Foster Agency when the city of philadelphia canceled its contract with the agency because they said it violated the citys laws against anti discrimination because this Catholic Agency would not recruit samesex couples. That was the narrow decision here. Chief justice writing for six of the justices and said that basically since philadelphia had made exceptions in its policy for other agencies, it should have done so as well for the Catholic Service organization and, also, as the Catholic Foster Agency talked about in its arguments, it said no gay couples had even applied to its agencies and samesex couples had other agencies in the city to go toward. What the court didnt get to is the broader issue that some wanted them to address which is, can religious institutions or businesses not serve or maybe even discriminate against people for their for being a same sex couple because of the religious beliefs of that institution . The court didnt come to that broad decision. Jessica and jeremy, thank you for that reporting. With us is one of the attorneys who filed the brief defending the Affordable Care act in the Supreme Court case, Attorney General for the state of virginia mark herring. Mr. Attorney general, thank you very much for being here. Lets start by, were you surprised by this decision and were you surprised by the way the Supreme Court broke on it, meaning three conservatives sided with the more liberal justices to protect this . Well, todays decision is a huge win for every american. Had this lawsuit been successful, it would have dismantled the entire Affordable Care act including medicaid expansion, protections for preexisting conditions would be taken away. In my home state of virginia alone, 642,000 virginians would have lost their health care, 3. 4 million virginians with preexisting conditions would lose those protections. It would have been devastating all across the country. Todays ruling was very decisive, 72 ruling, in front of a very conservative Supreme Court. I think its also important to remember how we got to where we are right now. This is a third major legal challenge. Ive been involved in two, this one and the one before which was a case out of virginia. Originally this was led by a group of republican attorneys general, led by texas, and they challenged this on what were really flimsy legal theories. It was meritless from the beginning. And then the Trump Administration sided with those republican attorneys general. So i and my democratic Attorney General colleagues said were going to fight for health care, for our residents and for the country. We intervened in texas. The case worked its way up to the Supreme Court, and today we won an astounding victory, 72, very decisive. Unfortunately in the meantime, millions of americans had to deal with the anxiety of having to worry about whether their health care would taken away from them at any moment. People like Breast Cancer survivors, worried about if their protections against preexisting conditions would go away . Would they be able to get coverage at a price they could afford or at all, for themselves and their families, and so many other like them. Today it is the Law Of The Land. It continues to be the Law Of The Land and i will continue to fight for health care. Everyone deserves access to Affordable Quality Health care no matter who you are, no matter what your medical history is, what your Employment Status is or what your financial background is. Mr. Attorney general, the decision wasnt really based on the merits of the law. It was based on the stand ding of those plaintiffs that, 72 the court found they didnt have standing to bring the case. You mentioned this is the third time this has been challenged. Do you expect this decision will make a fourth challenge any less likely . Well, the ruling was that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear those arguments which were meritless, and it didnt need to get to those meritless arguments because it didnt have jurisdiction to hear it. Will there be another challenge by conservative republicans continuing to challenge this . I dont think theres a good legal basis for it. They may try. But one thing is for certain. If they do, i and my democratic colleagues will be right in there fighting for health care, making sure americans have access to Affordable Quality Health care which they deserve. But do you agree with president obama who tweeted out that this means the Affordable Care act is here to stay, or is it not quite that easy . As i said, i dont think theres any legal basis for another challenge. Will there be one . Maybe. Well be in there to protect health care. After three challenges in front of very conservative courts, i think the signal is pretty clear that obama care, the Affordable Care act is here to stay. It is the Law Of The Land. If there are more legal challenges, well be right in there to beat them back. Even with this new court, 63 more conservative, with Amy Coney Barrett, we know that was a significant part of the confirmation for justice barrett. You expect that, if this comes back with the right plaintiffs, that this law will still stand . Absolutely. Look, the legal basis of their lawsuit was flimsy at best. It never should have seen the light of day. Really, it was a lawsuit that was a thinly veiled political attack. Weve seen republicans over and over trying to take Health Care Away from people. Will they try again . Maybe, but we will be in there and we will win and we will protect health care for all americans. I do just want to bring up that graphic again that shows the breakdown. I do think its interesting to see who aligned with whom. As we said well, this is how its broken down in terms of liberal and conservative. I want to show what happened with the decision today. As victor just said, Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh and john roberts as soon as i see the graphic, ill be able to tell you and Clarence Thomas sided with the majority opinion. There was Justice Alito and gorsuch who dissented. Basically they said theres nothing this court wont do to protect the Affordable Care act. They were sort of disparaging in saying that i felt the bias was towards the Affordable Care act. I think the court had a strong basis to do exactly what it did, and had it actually reached the merits, we would have won that, too. There was really no merit to this case. It never should have seen the light of day. Even the most conservative justices on this court could see there was no merit here and threw it out, and with instructions for the lower courts to dismiss the case. So its a strong ruling, a strong majority. Thats a great day for americans, to know their health care now is protected. They know, also, if theres another legal challenge, we will be right in there to fight for health care, to protect their health care. Again, Tens Of Millions of player cans would have lost their health coverage. Thats staggering. Over 130 million americans with preexisting conditions would have had their protections taken away. It would have thrown the Health Care Markets into turmoil. Thankfully, even this conservative Supreme Court could see the case was without merit and threw it out. Attorney general mark herring, thank you very much. Thank you. President Biden Returns to the white house to find a new bipartisan Infrastructure Plan. Could this be the one that breaks the gridlock . Plus, dramatic video of a thief who just does not care who is watching, and the bigger question here, whats behind San Franciscos surge of shoplifting. And here. And here. Which is why the scientific expertise that helps Operating Rooms stay clean is now helping the places you go every day too. Seek a commitment to clean. Look for the ecolab Science Certified seal. No, hes not in his room. Dad, why didnt you answer your phone . Your mother loved this park. She did. Sometimes you wanna go where Everybody Knows your name and theyre always glad you came welcome back, america. It su at progressive,e you. We love your pets as much as you do, like this guy in a hat. Thats why progressive Car Insurance covers your pets for up to 1,000 if theyre ever in a car accident with you. This mini majorettes gonna march her way right into your heart. Im sorry. Can we stop . I know that were selling Car Insurance here, but, you know, all the cute little animals, its too much. Define too much. Whats wrong with cute animals . So are we doing this or what . Nah, its over. [ sighs ] well, someones got to break the news to mittens. [ Squeaks Softly ] shes a diva. [ Mittens Squeaking ] President Biden is back In Washington. The todo list is long, a litany of stalled agenda items and a Congress Deadlocked over how to get them to his desk. Infrastructure, Voting Rights, Police Reform. Now there is some movement on an Infrastructure Plan to improve the countrys crumbling roads, bridges and energy systems. 21 senators, including 11 republicans, said they support this new infrastructure framework. Cnn Congressional Correspondent manu raju with us now. Still a huge Sticking Point on infrastructure, how to pay for it. What are you hearing . No question about it. Still a lot of details they have to work out, both on the process and the policy. The process, too, is important. What the democrats are saying, particularly those on the left who are concerned that their priorities are not going to get into this 1. 2 trillion eightyear plan is wait for the next bite at the apple, that being trite to move along through Straight Party lines through a Budget Process known as reconciliation. The person in charge of that on the senate side is bernie sanders, the Progressive Independent who caucuses with democrats. He told us hes looking at a 6 trillion price tag to move on Reconciliation Package that would include a lot of joe bidens agenda items. That 6 trillion number has caused concerns among moderate Senate Democrats who say they need to negotiate that price to be much lower. A lot needs to be determined. On the left, a lot of democrats are saying the moderates who negotiated this bipartisan deal need to agree to go Al Long Par Lines on that deal. Joe manchin has not yet committed to going along Straight Party lines. In talking to house democrats, they said manchin needs to commit in their view in order for them to support a bipartisan proposal. And then, manu, just this morning Mitch Mcconnell weighed in. What did he say . Mitch mcconnell made very clear that he is opposed to moving forward on anything on Voting Rights. He also made clear that an infrastructure package, a biparti