Health care and the threat that the Republican government poses to coverage for people with pre-existing conditions were key factors driving the massive Democratic wave that flipped 40 seats in the House. Now House Democrats, very well aware of that fact, are going to step up to defend the Affordable Care Act against Trump.
A lawsuit is still pending before District Court Judge for the Northern District of Texas Reed O'Connor, who should be releasing a ruling any time now. Why he hasn't is a bit of mystery. He's ruled against the law in the past, he's an extreme partisan, and it's been generally assumed that he was waiting until after the election to issue his ruling. It's likely that no matter how he rules, the outcome will be appealed to the U.S, Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, and from there probably to the Supreme Court—that is, unless at some point Republicans decide it's too toxic to continue to pursue.
If it does move forward to an appeal, House Democrats are going to step up to defend the law against what almost all legal scholars believe is an "absurd" and "ludicrous" challenge. The plaintiffs, led by the state of Texas, are arguing that because Congress repealed the individual mandate requiring everyone have insurance in their tax bill last year, the rest of the provisions should be struck down as unconstitutional. The Trump administration, rather than defending the law as administrations normally do, chimed in saying specifically that some of the law's most popular provisions should be struck down and eliminated. That includes protections for pre-existing conditions.
The problem the administration and the states suing have is easily solved, actual legal scholars say, by looking at Congress’ intent. When Congress passed the tax law and repealed the individual mandate, they left the rest of the law intact—they intended to preserve the insurance protections. In fact, a whole mess of Republicans running this cycle fell all over themselves to insist they want to keep those protections. That the states' and administration's position on this is so tenuous in this argument is demonstrated by the fact that several career attorneys in the Justice Department withdrew from the case before the administration filed its brief.
So who better to defend the law on the basis of congressional intent than Congress? That's what the soon-to-be Democrat-controlled House is going to do now, if necessary.
