Supreme Court to hear Obamacare subsidies case

[Drale]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Friday to hear a legal challenge to a key part of the Obamacare health law which, if successful, would deprive millions of Americans of tax-credit subsidies to help them afford health insurance coverage.

In a one-sentence order, the court said it would take up a case brought by conservative challengers of the law, the most sweeping overhaul of U.S. healthcare in decades and President Barack Obama's signature domestic policy accomplishment.

The Supreme Court will issue a ruling by the end of June in the case, in which the plaintiffs have appealed a July ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the subsidies.

http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-agrees-hear-obamacare-subsidies-case-180343820.html

[ctaylors6]

1. The case is not about whether

the subsidies are constitutional or whether Congress had the constitutional authority to provide for the subsidies. It's whether the ACA legislation itself provided for subsidies in the case of federally (as opposed to state) run exchanges.

[kentuck]

2. What happens if the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional?

Do those millions of folks now subsidized with Medicaid get a notice in the mail that they no longer have any coverage? Will they be angry and take it out on the Democrats?

[RadicalGeek]

3. May be the idea

But why can't we Democrats get as fired up about Citizen's United as the GOP is about the ACA?

[ctaylors6]

4. The case is about

Last edited Fri Nov 7, 2014, 07:08 PM - Edit history (1)

whether the president and the IRS are violating federal law by issuing those subsidies in the 36 federal-Exchange states. I don't think this case raised any constitutional issues, and it certainly isn't questioning the constitutionality of subsidies generally.