The Supreme Court decision protects the law, but some people remain very motivated to take down the ACA -- among other things.
The reaction of anti-ACA advocates to Thursday's ruling in favor of the Affordable Care Act has been outraged, and sometimes risible (here's someone who suggests that Obama threatened Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts' children to change his vote).
But after the outrage over Thursday's decision dies down, more serious opponents of the law -- ranging from politicians like Rep. Paul Ryan to the Chamber of Commerce, which has spent $27 million on anti-ACA ads) -- will keep working on its overturn.
Right now the hope is that Mitt Romney will be elected, and that he'll keep his promise to repeal the ACA. But win or lose, ACA opponents will stay hard at work.
And the ACA isn't their only target.
The law was portrayed by opponents as a bridge too far -- something so extraordinarily unconstitutional that it had to be killed. But the logic of the law's opponents can be used against Medicare and Social Security.
It's been done already.
In the court case Hall v. Sebelius, which an appeals court settled in February, plaintiffs claimed they wanted to get on a private medical insurance plan that gave less attractive terms to Medicare beneficiaries -- which they became, presumably against their wills, when they turned 65. They claimed to want off the Medicare rolls so they could get a better deal from the private insurer, and sued.
An appeals court ruled against them. "There is no statutory avenue for those who are 65 or older and receiving Social Security benefits to disclaim their legal entitlement to Medicare Part A benefits," said Judge Brett Kavanaugh in his ruling. "We understand plaintiffs’ frustration with their insurance situation and appreciate their desire for better private insurance coverage. But based on the law, we affirm the [prior] judgment of the District Court."
The vote was 2-1.
To conservative groups and pundits that publicized the case, the point was clearly not to get these folks the insurance of their choice, but to challenge the authority of the state to compel citizens to be on Medicare. Such people are not just against new Big-Government programs such as the ACA; they're also against the original Big-Government programs of the New Deal. Some of them are even against the U.S. Postal Service, which is explicitly mentioned in the original Constitution, on similar grounds.
As their goal is the dismantling, not only of Obamacare, but also of all federal welfare programs, they can't be expected to stop just because of a little setback like this.