Obamacare Slammed With More Legal Challenges and Theres No End in SightLily Dane Heres the rundown: The House Judiciary Committee will conduct a hearing titled The Presidents Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws, to examine whether Obama is rewriting his own law by using his executive powers to alter it or delay certain provisions. Rep Robert W. Goodlatte (R-VA), chairman of the committee, says that Obama has changed key provisions in Obamacare without congressional approval through executive actions, including the year-long delay of the employer mandate. In DC, a federal judge will hear oral arguments in one of several cases brought by business owners, individual consumers, and states including Indiana and Oklahoma, who say that the law does not grant the IRS the authority to provide tax credits or subsidies to people who buy insurance through the federal exchange. The legal theory behind the subsidy cases will also be explored: that the IRS, and by extension, Obama ignored the will of Congress, which explicitly allowed tax credits and subsidies only for those buying coverage through state exchanges. Organizations including the Cato Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute have been researching the legal issues surrounding the subsidies for three years: Subsidies and tax credits, which could be available to millions of low- and middle-income Americans, are the foundation of Obamas promise of affordable care. Congress wrote that such financial help would be available to people enrolled through an exchange established by the state under the law. Thats where the problem lies: since the passage of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010, the majority of states (nearly three dozen) decided not to set up their own exchanges. As a result, the perpetually broken HealthCare.gov has to handle most of the requests. If courts decide that customers cannot obtain subsidies through the federal exchange, it would make the HealthCare.gov problems look like a hiccup, Cannon explained. In addition, a lawsuit claiming that the law is unconstitutional because it was introduced in the Senate, not the House (where tax bills must originate) has been filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation. Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University and Cannons colleague, predicts the ACA will be the subject of lawsuits for years: Among critics of the law there is a feeling that the law doesnt have the same legitimacy as a law that passed with bipartisan support, he said. Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared.Her goal is to help people to Wake the Flock Up! 