The Supreme Court handed down its verdict on the "King v. Burwell" case on Thursday, June 25, with a 6-3 verdict in favor of taking a "vague" view of the language in the PPACA. In specific, the Supreme Court ruled that the Affordable Care Act may provide nationwide tax subsidies designed to help certain poor and middle-class people purchase health insurance.

The law, as originally written, stated that certain individuals would be eligible for subsidies specifically in states that had their own insurance exchanges. However, it turns out, the majority of states did not set up their own exchanges, but rather deferred to the Federal exchange. And, there was nothing in the PPACA law that said these subsidies would also be available to individuals in states that were relying on the Federal exchange.

However, in writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., wrote that the words in question "an exchange established by the state" must be understood as part of a larger statutory plan. "In this instance, the context and structure of the act compels us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase."

Complete your profile to continue reading and get FREE access to BenefitsPRO, part of your ALM digital membership.

  • Critical BenefitsPRO information including cutting edge post-reform success strategies, access to educational webcasts and videos, resources from industry leaders, and informative Newsletters.
  • Exclusive discounts on ALM, BenefitsPRO magazine and BenefitsPRO.com events
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including ThinkAdvisor.com and Law.com
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.