IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 14 

Authorizing the Speaker, on behalf of the House of Representatives, to intervene, otherwise appear, or take any other steps in the case of Texas 

v. United States, and in any appellate proceedings arising from such 

case, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2019 

Mr. ALLRED (for himself, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. NEAL, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, 

Mr. NADLER, Mr. HOYER, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. MCGOVERN, and Ms. 

PELOSI) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the Speaker, on behalf of the House of Representatives, to intervene, otherwise appear, or take any 

other steps in the case of Texas v. United States, and 

in any appellate proceedings arising from such case, and 

for other purposes. 

Whereas Texas, Wisconsin, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, 

Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Governor 

Paul LePage of Maine, Mississippi (by and through Governor Phil Bryant), Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, 

South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and 

West Virginia have filed suit in the United States DisVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:00 Jan 04, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR14.IH HR14

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 14 IH 

trict Court for the Northern District of Texas, arguing 

that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

(Public Law 111–148; 124 Stat. 119) is unconstitutional 

and should be enjoined by asserting that the Act’s requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage (commonly known as the ‘‘individual responsibility provision’’) 

in section 5000A(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

1986, is unconstitutional following the amendment of 

that provision by the Act to provide for reconciliation 

pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution 

on the budget for fiscal year 2018 (Public Law 115–97) 

(commonly known as the ‘‘Tax Cuts and Jobs Act’’); 

Whereas these State and individual plaintiffs also seek to 

strike down the entire Patient Protection and Affordable 

Care Act as not severable from the individual responsibility provision; 

Whereas, on June 7, 2018, the Department of Justice refused to defend the constitutionality of the amended individual responsibility provision, despite the well-established 

duty of the Department to defend Federal statutes where 

reasonable arguments can be made in their defense; 

Whereas the Department of Justice not only refused to defend the amended individual responsibility provision, but 

affirmatively argued that this provision is unconstitutional and that the provisions of the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act guaranteeing issuance of health 

insurance coverage regardless of health status or preexisting conditions (commonly known as the ‘‘guaranteed 

issue provision’’) found in sections 2702, 2704, and 

2705(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 

300gg–1, 300gg–3, 300gg–4(a)) and prohibitions on discriminatory premium rates (commonly known as the 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 14 IH 

‘‘community rating provision’’) found in sections 2701 

and 2705(b) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 

300gg(a)(1), 300gg–4(b)) must now be struck down as 

not severable from the individual responsibility provision; 

Whereas the district court recently held that the individual 

responsibility provision is unconstitutional and that all of 

the remaining provisions of the Patient Protection and 

Affordable Care act are inseverable and therefore invalid; 

Whereas up to 133 million nonelderly Americans have some 

type of preexisting health condition, such as, but not limited to, diabetes, high cholesterol, cancer, arthritis, and 

asthma, that could affect their insurance; 

Whereas prior to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

Act and the enactment of protections such as guaranteed 

issue and community rating, millions of Americans were 

denied health insurance coverage, were unable to obtain 

coverage of necessary medical services, or were priced out 

of the individual market due to preexisting conditions; 

Whereas without such protections for preexisting conditions, 

millions of Americans could once again lose access to affordable, comprehensive health insurance; 

Whereas more than 13 million Americans who gained coverage in States that expanded Medicaid eligibility under 

the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could 

lose coverage if the Act were struck down in its entirety; 

Whereas more than 2 million young adults who gained coverage under a provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act allowing individuals under the age of 

26 to stay on their parents’ insurance could lose coverage 

if the Act were struck down in its entirety; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
4 

•HRES 14 IH 

Whereas more than 8.9 million low and middle-income Americans who received tax credits averaging $520 per month 

to help pay for health insurance in the individual market 

under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

could lose coverage if the Act were struck down in its entirety; 

Whereas an estimated 105 million Americans who now enjoy 

coverage without lifetime limits due to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could once again face 

lifetime limits on their benefits if the Act were struck 

down in its entirety; and 

Whereas nearly 12 million Medicare beneficiaries who received an average of $2,200 in savings on prescription 

drugs due to the closing of the Medicare prescription 

drug donut hole under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would face rising drug costs if the Act 

were struck down in its entirety: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZING LEGAL ACTION BY HOUSE. 

3 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Speaker, on behalf of the 

4 House of Representatives, is authorized to intervene, oth5 erwise appear, or take any other steps in the case of Texas 

6 v. United States, No. 4:18–cv–00167–O (N.D. Tex.) and 

7 in any appellate proceedings arising from such case. The 

8 Speaker, in consultation with the Bipartisan Legal Advi9 sory Group, is also authorized to intervene, otherwise ap10 pear, or take any other steps in any other cases involving 

11 the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to protect 

12 the institutional interests of the House and to defend such 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
5 

•HRES 14 IH 

1 Act, the amendments made by such Act to other provisions 

2 of law, and any amendments to such provisions, including 

3 the provisions ensuring affordable health coverage for 

4 those with preexisting conditions. 

5 (b) ROLE OF GENERAL COUNSEL.—The Office of 

6 General Counsel of the House of Representatives, at the 

7 direction of the Speaker, shall represent the House in any 

8 litigation pursuant to this title. The Office of General 

9 Counsel may employ the services of outside counsel, in10 cluding pro bono counsel, or other experts for this pur11 pose. 

12 (c) REPORTS ON AMOUNTS EXPENDED.—The chair 

13 of the Committee on House Administration shall cause to 

14 be printed in the Congressional Record a statement setting 

15 forth the aggregate amounts expended by the Office of 

16 General Counsel on outside counsel and other experts pur17 suant to this title on a quarterly basis, and such statement 

18 shall be submitted for printing not more than 30 days 

19 after the expiration of each such quarter. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS