There still remains hope within Oklahoma’s Pruitt vs Sebelius lawsuit to stop the IRS from authorizing the distribution of illegal premium assistance subsidies in Obamcare’s federally-run health insurance marketplaces.

A federal judge Monday denied most of the federal government’s motion to dismiss Oklahoma’s legal challenge to implementation of the new federal health care law.

In a 27-page decision, U.S. District Judge Ronald White of Muskogee rejected assertions by government lawyers that the state of Oklahoma lacked legal standing to challenge implementation of the Affordable Care Act. The decision means that Attorney General Scott Pruitt, who filed a lawsuit challenging the law in 2011, can continue to present his case in court.

The marketplaces/exchanges represent the pulse of Obamacare.  The entire law relies on it’s “affordability promise” by having these arterial regulatory bodies pump federal subsidies into the hands of financially eligible health insurance consumers.  These sliding-scale subsidies will help offset costs of health plans offered on the online marketplaces.  Both the text of the Affordable Care Act and original Congressional intent clearly express that such subsidies are to be distributed in only states that have established state-based health insurance marketplaces.  34 States have opted for the federally-run marketplaces.

William Kristol writes on the marketplaces in The Weekly Standard:

..The exchanges are the beating heart of Obamacare: They are the mechanism for the government subsidies designed to make millions more Americans ever more dependent on big government.    

If the IRS followed the law, the denial of subsidies in 34 states means that health plans offered on the exchanges would no longer be affordable.  Furthermore, this would also eliminate both the employer and individual mandate.

If the law ever re-opens, a real health insurance reform would enable citizens to buy plans across state lines that are not tied to employers.  More competition among insurance companies would reduce rates and increase options for consumers, including those with pre-existing conditions.  Individuals possess the right to not be forced to purchase health coverage and should shop for de-regulated health plans that best suit their needs.