There are any number of opinion features saying how this new Texas ACA ruling cannot stand, but I think they are wrong. Based only on what has been decided, I think the Judge was correct. Don't get me wrong, the result is morally reprehensible, but the ruling was correct.
Here is my logic.
In 2012 Chief Justice John Roberts was the vote to uphold the Affordable Care Act based on Congress' ability to tax. He defined the penalty as a legal tax and therefore allowed the ACA to go forward.
Then, in 2015, in King v Burwell Roberts expanded on this idea, via the tax credits part of the process even in states that did not expand medicare.
But last year, in the Great Billionaire Tax Break of 2018 bill, the Congress stripped out the penalty, which removed the tax from the ACA. Since the ACA was only legal because of said penalty/tax, then repealing it should have repealed the ACA.
This screws millions of people, so it has not been enacted yet. The Judge placed an injunction on it since it will be appealed. Sooner or later it will get to the Supreme Court. But, given the history so far, I don't see how the Supremes can reasonable overturn this decision.
Republicans have, it seems, gotten what they wanted. This lawsuit was raised by over 20 Republican state Attorney Generals, supported by Trump's Justice Department (after being opposed by Obama's Justice Department) and many of the Republican Congressmen. After the mid-terms they are fleeing this decision like rats from a sinking White House, but they are listed on the lawsuit as supporting it.
Because sick and dying poor Americans are the side-effect of giving the richest of Americans a billion dollar tax break.