Opponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are hoping the third time is the charm. Although the Supreme Court has twice upheld central features of President Obama's signature health law in landmark decisions, conservative activists are still hopeful that another one of their legal challenges will get a day in front of the high court.

The lawsuit, Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, was filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative advocacy group, and claims the PPACA is unconstitutional because it was passed incorrectly. Specifically, it claims the legislation is in violation of the Origination Clause in the Constitution, which specifies that all bills that raise revenue must originate in the House of Representatives, rather than the Senate. Although the PPACA was never marketed as a tax bill, the Supreme Court essentially ruled that the legislation –– specifically the individual mandate to buy insurance –– was a form of taxation in its first decision upholding the law in 2012.

The Sissel challenge seeks to invoke the Court's first decision in favor of the PPACA to argue that the law is unconstitutional.