The Supreme Court has rejected the constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate in California et al v Texas et al, but only on procedural grounds. The court voted 7-2 that the plaintiff lacks standing for failure to show actual injury, and thus the case could not proceed. 

In delivering the majority opinion, Justice Breyer stated, “We do not reach these questions of the Act’s validity, however, for Texas and the other plaintiffs in this suit lack the standing necessary to raise them.” 

The dissenting Justices made note of the majority’s procedural holding, suggesting the majority opinion was an effort to avoid any constitutional findings in the case.

In his dissent, Justice Alito summarized the core argument of plaintiffs in numerous ACA challenges to date when he stated “Texas and the other state plaintiffs have standing, and now that the “tax” imposed by the individual mandate is set at $0, the mandate cannot be sustained under the taxing power. As a result, it is clearly unconstitutional, and to the extent that the provisions of the ACA that burden the States are inextricably linked to the individual mandate, they too are unenforceable.”

For the time being, the ACA remains enforceable law, and no immediate changes are on the horizon.

The full text of the Court’s opinion can be seen here.