A new legal challenge to ObamaCare will head to the Supreme Court next year and, depending on how they rule, could dismantle the President’s signature policy.
The Hill is reporting that the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, known as King v. Burwell, which raises the question of whether or not the federal government can hand out healthcare subsidies in 34 states that do not run their own exchange.
According to language currently appearing in the law, only state-run exchanges are eligible for the subsidies. Proponents say this language amounts to nothing more than “typos”. They claim that language found in the rest of the law makes it clear that they mean for subsidies to be available nationwide regardless of who was running the exchange.
Because only 13 states and Washington DC are operating their own exchanges, if the Court rules against the Obama administration, millions of Americans lose their subsidies, without which most low and middle-income Americans would not be able to afford health insurance.
About 87 percent of people currently signed up for health insurance under the so-called Affordable Care Act (ACA) are receiving subsidies which total $36 billion.
Two U.S. courts have already heard King v. Burwell, with both reaching different conclusions.
Another case, Halbig v. Burwell, which deals with the same issue, is scheduled to be reheard by a full circuit panel on Dec. 17.
Court watchers believe the Supreme Court took the King case because of the urgency of the situation.
Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, who is backing the King case, told Politico that he believes the Justices realized that because the law is already in effect and people are getting subsidies – which they may have to pay back – someone needs to act fast to resolve this issue.
“If the plaintiffs are right, then we need a resolution of this case to put an end to the greatest scandal of the Obama administration, because that’s what these cases are about,” Cannon said.
A ruling against the administration would also set off a “domino effect” on other parts of the law, forcing the government to rethink the individual mandate, regulatory reforms and state exchanges.
“If the President has been overstepping his authority as the text of the ACA suggests, this means that his Administration has been misrepresenting the true costs of Obamacare to millions of Americans across the country,” wrote Rep. Diane Black (R-TN).
“Even more worrisome is what implications this could have for Americans who have already received subsidies and may be on the hook for back taxes,” she said.
The White House issued a statement saying they are confident that the Supreme Court “will recognize both the clear reading of the entire law, and the certain intent of Congress in crafting it.”
The nation’s highest court is expected to hear arguments in the case in March and will issue a ruling sometime in June, 2015.
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly®/Women of Grace® http://www.womenofgrace.com
