Read time: 3 minutes

Sen. Mike Lee Really Doesn't Want To Talk About The Impact Of Ripping Healthcare Away From Millions

Utah Sen. Mike Lee was more than happy to weigh in on his opinion of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act and the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, but really didn't want to say anything about what it would mean for the lives of millions of Americans if the law is repealed.
Views:

Utah Sen. Mike Lee was more than happy to weigh in on his opinion of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act and the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, but really didn't want to say anything about what it would mean for the lives of millions of Americans if the law is repealed.

During an interview this Sunday on ABC's This Week, Lee was asked by host George Stephanopoulos about a backlash over their push to push the nomination through prior to the election. Lee responded that "Trump campaigned in 2016, and he's campaigning again this time, promising to appoint judges to federal courts and justices to the U.S. Supreme Court who are textualists and who are originalists" and that he was simply "fulfilling that promise" with the nomination of Barrett.

Never mind that Trump has also been promising since he first started campaigning for president that he was going to give the American people a “terrific,” “phenomenal” and “fantastic” new health care plan to replace the ACA, and that he and his party have delivered on exactly nothing when it comes to replacing the law they've been attempting to repeal for years on end.

After Stephanopoulos asked Lee on what her nomination would mean for the future of Roe vs Wade, Lee dismissed those concerns as well, saying you can't look at the confirmation of a justice and "boil down that jurist's contribution to the law, past and future, to what they might do with a single case," which no one is trying to do. People who have concerns about Barrett are worried on how she'll rule on a whole host off issues from abortion, to LBGTQ rights, to worker's rights, to environmental issues, to the Affordable Care Act.

When Lee was asked if he was concerned, as Sen. Dick Durbin had just discussed in an earlier interview, that "if Judge Barrett is confirmed, the Affordable Care Act and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions will go down as well." Lee was ready to discuss anything other than the fact that the repeal of the ACA could potentially strip coverage from 23 million Americans and the real impact that decision would have on his constituents that he's supposed to be representing's lives.

LEE: Look, the patient protection and Affordable Care Act was, I believe, unconstitutional when it was enacted. It was unconstitutional when it was litigated in 2012. It was unconstitutional when Chief Justice Roberts, writing for a narrow five member majority, re-wrote the Affordable Care Act in two critical ways in order to render an otherwise inevitably unconstitutional law constitutional. And so the fact that Congress chose to enact an unconstitutional law shouldn't tarnish Judge Barrett in this. Her job is to figure out whether it's unconstitutional or not. I don't believe it is. John Roberts' re-wrote it twice in order to make it appear constitutional, which it is not.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You've got a very forthright opinion there on the Affordable Care Act. A lot of your colleagues are concerned that that forthright opinion is going to cost you on November 3rd?

LEE: OK, well, look, Judge Barrett, we're talking about Judge Barrett here and we're talking about constitutionality. Judge Barrett would look at this, not on the basis of what's politically expedient. She'd look at it on the basis of constitutionality.

Now, I don't purport to speak for what Judge Barrett might say or might think. You asked me for my opinion on the constitutionality on the Affordable Care Act. I don't believe it is. I have no idea how she would rule on this particular case.

They know exactly how she's going to rule on the case. It's one of the reasons she was selected and why dark money groups like the Judicial Crisis Network have been pushing so hard to get her on the court.

Can you help us out?

For 16 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit. We work 7 days a week, 16 hours a day for our labor of love, but with rising hosting and associated costs, we need your help! Could you donate $20 for 2020? Please consider a one time or recurring donation of whatever amount you can spare, or consider subscribing for an ad-free experience. It will be greatly appreciated and help us continue our mission of exposing the real FAKE NEWS!

More C&L Coverage

Comments

NOTE: We will be changing to a new commenting platform in the next couple of weeks. We will supply more details as we get closer to the change. We understand some users are having problems with comments loading and this will hopefully remedy that problem

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.