Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-840_6jfm.pdf
Page Number: 37

12 

CALIFORNIA v. TEXAS 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

6722.6 

That  leaves  redressability,  which  asks  whether  the  re-
quested relief is likely to redress the party’s injury.  Steel 
Co.  v.  Citizens  for  Better  Environment,  523  U. S.  83,  103 
(1998).  Looking  to  the  relief  the  District  Court  in  fact 
granted  makes  it  obvious  that  the  States’  injuries  in  the 
form  of  ongoing  reporting  expenses  are  redressable.    The 
District  Court  entered  a  judgment  that,  among  other
things, declared the reporting requirements in §§6055 and 
6056 unenforceable.  See 340 F. Supp. 3d, at 619.  With that 
judgment in hand, the States would be freed from the obli-
gation  to  expend  funds  to  comply  with  those  require-
ments—redressing their financial injury prospectively.

The  state  plaintiffs  have  similarly  demonstrated  stand-
ing to seek relief from ACA provisions requiring them to of-
fer  expensive  health  insurance  coverage  for  their  employ-
ees.  Consider  the  ACA’s  requirement  that  group  health 
plans  and  health  insurance  offerings  extend  coverage  to 
adult children until they reach the age of 26.  See 42 U. S. C. 
§300gg–14(a).  Texas has spent more than $80 million com-
plying with that rule.  App. 81.  Missouri has spent more 
than $10 million.  Id., at 159; id., at 157 (“The Missouri Con-
solidated Health Care Plan is a non-federal governmental
health  plan  which  provides  insurance  coverage  for  most 
state  employees”);  id.,  at  159  (Missouri  will  “indefinitely 
continue paying these additional costs”).

These obligations, too, are backed by substantial enforce-
ment mechanisms.  For instance, the state plaintiffs gener-
ally  must  offer  employees  coverage  that  complies  with
§300gg–14 to avoid violating the employer mandate, see 26
U. S. C. §4980H, and the failure to comply would expose the
States  to  penalties  of  thousands  of  dollars  per  employee
each year, see §§4980H(a), (b), (c)(1).  Similarly, the failure 

—————— 

6 Willful failure to comply with the reporting requirements in §§6055 

and 6056 can also result in criminal penalties.  See 26 U. S. C. §7203.