Four cities sue Trump, alleging ACA sabotage

The cities argue that Trump’s actions violate the Constitution’s provision that the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

The suit cites a number of Trump’s actions in support of its suit, including the expansion of insurance options that don’t comply with ACA requirements. (Photo: Shutterstock)

Another day, another lawsuit against President Trump.

This time, reports The Hill, four cities have filed suit against the president alleging that his “sabotage” of the Affordable Care Act is a violation of his constitutional duty to uphold the law.

Baltimore, Chicago, Columbus and Cincinnati filed their suit in federal court in Maryland, with the suit alleging that Trump’s actions against the ACA violate the Constitution’s provision that the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Related: ACA confusion a boon for health care consultants

In addition, the suit says that his actions are “an affront to the rule of law: to our constitutional system, under which Congress enacts laws and the President faithfully implements them.”

The suit cites a number of Trump’s actions in support of its suit, including the shortening of the signup period for ACA coverage; the cut in funding for outreach to assist people in finding and signing up for coverage; and the expansion of insurance options that don’t comply with ACA requirements.

It also uses Trump’s own words in support of its cause, noting, “President Trump and his Administration have been remarkably transparent about their intent and their approach.” It further quotes statements from Trump himself that “we are getting rid of ObamaCare,” and “essentially, we have gotten rid of it” to support their assertion that he has sabotaged the law.

Nonetheless, it could be an uphill slog for their case, since The Hill cites a Vox report in which Abbe Gluck, a Yale Law School professor who supports the ACA, writes that cases arguing the president is not faithfully executing laws are a “tall order because the executive is often vested with broad discretion to implement the law.”

However, Gluck adds, “But it is impossible to recall a president who has been as clear about his intent to sabotage a major federal law as this president has been about his intent with respect to the ACA.”