On June 25 the Supreme Court held that Affordable Care Act subsidies are available to individuals in States that have a Federal Exchange as well as a State Exchange. In upholding the subsidies, the majority concluded that the Court must read the statutory provisions of the ACA “in context,” and that “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them.” In a dissent joined by two colleagues, Justice Scalia wrote that the Court’s conclusion was “quite absurd,” and that “[w]ords no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the state.’” How momentous is today’s decision?
- Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
- Prof. Josh Blackman, South Texas College of Law
- David B. Rivkin, Jr., Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP