IV 
116TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. RES. 14 
Authorizing the Speaker, on behalf of the House of Representatives, to inter-
vene, 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 Admin-
istration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdic-
tion of the committee concerned 
RESOLUTION 
Authorizing the Speaker, on behalf of the House of Rep-
resentatives, 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 Gov-
ernor Phil Bryant), Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, 
South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and 
West Virginia have filed suit in the United States Dis-
VerDate 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
•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 re-
quirement to maintain minimum essential coverage (com-
monly 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 responsi-
bility provision; 
Whereas, on June 7, 2018, the Department of Justice re-
fused to defend the constitutionality of the amended indi-
vidual 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 de-
fend the amended individual responsibility provision, but 
affirmatively argued that this provision is unconstitu-
tional and that the provisions of the Patient Protection 
and Affordable Care Act guaranteeing issuance of health 
insurance coverage regardless of health status or pre-
existing 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 dis-
criminatory premium rates (commonly known as the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:00 Jan 04, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR14.IH
HR14
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
•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 lim-
ited 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 af-
fordable, comprehensive health insurance; 
Whereas more than 13 million Americans who gained cov-
erage 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 cov-
erage under a provision of the Patient Protection and Af-
fordable 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; 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:00 Jan 04, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR14.IH
HR14
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
•HRES 14 IH 
Whereas more than 8.9 million low and middle-income Ameri-
cans 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 en-
tirety; 
Whereas an estimated 105 million Americans who now enjoy 
coverage without lifetime limits due to the Patient Pro-
tection 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 re-
ceived 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 Afford-
able Care Act would face rising drug costs if the Act 
were struck down in its entirety: Now, therefore, be it 
Resolved, 
SECTION 1. AUTHORIZING LEGAL ACTION BY HOUSE. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Speaker, on behalf of the 
House of Representatives, is authorized to intervene, oth-
erwise appear, or take any other steps in the case of Texas 
v. United States, No. 4:18–cv–00167–O (N.D. Tex.) and 
in any appellate proceedings arising from such case. The 
Speaker, in consultation with the Bipartisan Legal Advi-
sory Group, is also authorized to intervene, otherwise ap-
pear, or take any other steps in any other cases involving 
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to protect 
the institutional interests of the House and to defend such 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:00 Jan 04, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\HR14.IH
HR14
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS