Another lawsuit against ACA

The Affordable Care Act, passed in 2010, has attracted the attention of several lawsuits. The Supreme Court has yet to release a decision for a case that it heard (California vs. Texas), and Kaiser Health News reported on yet another lawsuit that received clearance for the lawsuit to proceed. This lawsuit attacks the requirement that preventive services must be free. While requiring that preventive services must be free might be good policy (I am unaware how strongly the evidence supports or undermines that), the case raises some constitutional questions, including one regarding whether officials who are neither appointed by the president nor confirmed by the Senate are authorized by the constitution to make binding regulatory decisions.

This current lawsuit attacks specific provisions of the ACA, while the Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the entire legislation after the individual mandate was revoked. After seeing these many attacks on the ACA (whether in rhetoric or via lawsuits), it would be nice to see opponents spell out what they think would be a better plan and understand what advantages such plans would offer.