The Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, is once again under fire for questions of its constitutionality, exemplifying the conversation over the role the U.S. Constitution has in modern America.

The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), a Californian freedom-based public interest legal organization, is using its attorneys to challenge the ACA, according to pacificlegal.org. The Origination Clause of the constitution states that a revenue-generating bill must originate in the House of Representatives.

President Barack Obama’s healthcare plan originated in the Senate, argues the PLF, and if the courts determine the ACA is a revenue-generating piece of legislation they may declare it unconstitutional. The highly conservative, strict-constitutionalist organization looks to a 2012 Supreme Court decision as legal evidence the ACA produces revenue for the federal government.

The PFL already had its attorneys file an opening brief with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and Fox News reported it is petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case. The move is not the first time an organization has tried to use the judicial system to knock out the ACA, and it will likely not be the last.

A common approach to repeal the law is to try to get the Supreme Court to declare it is unconstitutional in some way, shape or form. One of two problems commonly arise when that happens — either small technicalities can prove the law is constitutional, or loose interpretations of the constitution support the existence of the ACA.

The appeals court examining PLF’s case said the bill did originate in the House, but acknowledged the language of the bill was dramatically changed in the Senate, according to the Associated Press. Details like that may seem like loopholes in the law, but it fails to compare to the magnitude of ignoring America’s legal framework.

Strict constitutionalists argue the U.S. Constitution should have the same meaning that the Founding Fathers originally intended, and its clauses should not be interpreted to include more powers than what was first imagined. From this view, the ACA would be considered illegal because the constitution does not explicitly state the federal government has the authority to regulate healthcare services. In fact, the Ninth Amendment of the Bill of Rights gives all powers not delegated to the federal government to the state governments.

Healthcare, education and labor laws are some topics strict constitutionalists often feel should be legally given to the state to manage. Modern America clearly does not prescribe to this ideology, but rather looks to the Elastic Clause found in Article 1, Section 8.

It states the federal government has the power, “To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by the constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.”

The phrase, “necessary and proper” is often cited as a gateway for Congress to expand upon duties listed in the section. Another phrase, “provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” gives many Americans the impression the federal government can pass and maintain laws on whatever is deemed helpful for the general population.

Political junkies, judges, lawmakers and scholars can debate and interpret the constitution in a number of ways, but oddly enough they agree the 226-year-old document is living and adapts to the modern world. It is living in the sense it can be amended through proper procedures, but oftentimes officials overlook (for better or worse) the necessity of that process and simply focus on ambiguous clauses to pass laws.

The ACA may provide for the general welfare of the U.S., it may have originated in the House and may be beneficial to many Americans, but there will always be those who argue against it. Perhaps the most effective way to end the debate on the constitutionality of any given government power is to attempt to ratify those debated powers through the amendment process. 

Share