�鶹Ů��

Speaker John A. Boehner may be having trouble with conservative House Republicans, but he is on a bit of a roll in the federal lawsuit brought against the Obama administration over the new health care law. Judge Rosemary M. Collyer of Federal District Court on Monday denied the Obama administration’s request for an immediate appeal of her ruling that the House had the standing to sue the administration. The House says the law includes billions of dollars for new health insurance subsidies that were never authorized by Congress. (Hulse, 10/20)

A federal judge has rejected a request by the Obama administration for permission to immediately appeal last month’s ruling that allowed House Republicans to pursue their lawsuit against the 2010 health-care law. Last month U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer allowed House Republicans to proceed with parts of their Obamacare lawsuit, ruling that the House has legal standing to bring claims alleging the Obama administration overstepped its bounds in how it’s paying for portions of the health law. In doing so, the judge rejected the Obama administration’s argument that the court should not referee such a dispute between the legislative and executive branches. (Gershman, 10/19)

House Republicans called Monday's ruling a victory. "It's another important step toward holding the president accountable for his unconstitutional actions," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a written statement. The Obama administration has said the courts should not get involved in a political dispute between the executive and legislative branches, arguing that judges have never done so. White House spokeswoman Katie Hill said the GOP lawsuit was a "taxpayer-funded political stunt" and expressed disappointment with Monday's ruling. (Fram, 10/19)

The district court judge, Rosemary Collyer, a Republican appointee of President George W. Bush, last month gave the House GOP a big win by ruling that their lawsuit against the administration could move forward. ... Collyer wrote that a ruling on the substance of the case would not take much more time — “a matter of months” — and that the appeals court “will be best served by reviewing a complete record” on both the standing issue and the substance of the case. (Sullivan, 10/19)

At issue in the case is the so-called "cost sharing" provisions that require insurance companies offering health plans through the law to reduce the out-of-pocket costs for policy holders who qualify. The government offsets the added costs to insurance companies by reimbursing them, but the lawmakers say that Congress did not properly approve the money for those reimbursements. (de Vogue, 10/19)

The House argues that Congress never specifically approved spending that money, and in fact denied the administration's request for it. The Obama administration insists it is instead relying on previously allocated money that it is allowed to use. (10/19)