Video: Knock on Wood| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Lupus Nephritis
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare Insurance Subsidies

Lawrence Hurley  |  June 25, 2015

WASHINGTON (Reuters)—The U.S. Supreme Court preserved President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law on Thursday, upholding crucial tax subsidies while turning aside a conservative legal challenge that could have doomed the law.

“After more than 50 votes in Congress to repeal or weaken this law, after a presidential election based in part on preserving or repealing this law, after multiple challenges to this law before the Supreme Court, the Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” Obama said in the White House Rose Garden.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, wrote in the 6-3 ruling that Congress clearly intended for the tax subsidies that help low- and moderate-income people buy private health insurance to be available in all 50 states.

The court decided that the law, widely known as Obamacare, did not restrict the subsidies to states that establish their own online health insurance exchanges.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

“Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” Roberts wrote in the court’s decision, adding that nationwide availability of the credits is required to “avoid the type of calamitous result that Congress plainly meant to avoid.”

Roberts was joined by fellow conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy and the court’s four liberal members in the majority.

It marked the second time in three years that the high court ruled against a major challenge to the law brought by conservatives. Both rulings were written by Roberts. Republicans have fought the law since its inception.

With the ruling, the current system will remain in place, with subsidies that help low- and moderate-income people buy private health insurance available in all 50 states. If the challengers had won, at least 6.4 million people in at least 34 states would have lost the subsidies whose average value is $272 per month.

“There can be no doubt that this law is working,” Obama said. “It has changed, and in some cases saved, American lives. It set this country on a smarter, stronger course.”

The decision means the subsidies will remain not just in the 13 states that have set up their own exchanges and the three states that have state-federal hybrid exchanges, but also in the 34 states that use the exchange run by the federal government.

The case centered on the tax subsidies offered under the law, passed by Obama’s fellow Democrats in Congress in 2010 over unified Republican opposition. The exchanges are online marketplaces that allow consumers to shop among competing insurance plans.

The question before the justices was whether a four-word phrase in the expansive law saying subsidies are available to those buying insurance on exchanges “established by the state” has been correctly interpreted by the administration to allow subsidies to be available nationwide.

Roberts wrote that although the conservative challengers’ arguments about the plain meaning of the statute were “strong,” the “context and structure of the act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.”

Scalia Dissents
After Chief Justice Roberts announced the decision from the bench, Justice Antonin Scalia read for 11 minutes from his dissenting opinion.

Scalia said the statute’s words were clear, that Congress wanted to limit the credits to the state exchanges. Scalia recalled the court’s 2012 decision narrowly upholding the law, again over his dissent.

“We really should start calling the law SCOTUScare,” Scalia said. SCOTUS is the acronym for the Supreme Court of the United States.

“This court has no free-floating power to rescue Congress from its drafting mistakes,” Scalia added.

Roberts, sitting next to him on the bench, sat stone-faced. He smiled slightly at the SCOTUScare line, but otherwise betrayed no emotion.

Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined Scalia’s dissent.

The court, in another ruling favoring the Obama administration on Thursday, also embraced a broad interpretation of the type of discrimination claims that can be made under the landmark Fair Housing Act.

The Obamacare ruling will come as a major relief to Obama as he seeks to ensure that his legacy legislative achievement is implemented effectively and survives political and legal attacks before he leaves office in early 2017.

“The subsidies upheld today help patients afford health insurance so they can see a doctor when they need one and not have to wait until a small health problem becomes a crisis,” said Dr. Steven Stack, president of the American Medical Association.

Shares of hospital operators, health services providers and insurers rallied broadly following the court’s decision to uphold the subsidies. Top gainers included hospital companies Tenet Healthcare Corp., up 8.8 percent, and Community Health Systems Inc., up 8.5 percent.

The Democratic-backed law aimed to help millions of Americans who lacked any health insurance afford coverage.

The Obama administration has hailed the law as a success, saying 16.4 million previously uninsured people have gained health insurance since it was enacted. There are currently around 26 million people without health insurance, according to government figures.

Conservatives have called the law a government overreach and “socialized medicine.” Opponents repeatedly but unsuccessfully sought to repeal it in Congress and launched a series of legal challenges. In 2012, Roberts cast the deciding vote in a 5-4 decision that upheld the law on constitutional grounds, siding with the court’s four liberals.

The current case started as a long-shot legal challenge by conservative lawyers that oppose the law. Financed by a libertarian Washington group called the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the lawyers recruited four people from Virginia to be the plaintiffs. The lead plaintiff was a self-employed limousine driver named David King.

The plaintiffs said they were “deeply disappointed” with the ruling. The law “unfairly restricts the health insurance choices of millions of people, and it threatens their jobs as well,” they added.

The challengers said that the four-word phrase in the law indicates that only people who have bought insurance on state-established exchanges qualify for the tax-credit subsidies.

The Obama administration, backed by the healthcare industry, said other provisions in the law made clear that Congress intended the subsidies to be available nationwide regardless of whether states set up their own exchanges or leave the task to the federal government.

The case is King v. Burwell, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 14-114.

Page: 1 2 3 | Multi-Page
Share: 

Filed under:Legislation & AdvocacyProfessional Topics Tagged with:Health InsuranceLegislationObamacareSupreme Court

Related Articles

    The Impact of U.S. Supreme Court Decisions on Medical Affairs, Healthcare Policy

    October 11, 2016

    The U.S. Supreme Court As America’s capital, Washington, D.C., maintains an outsized influence in our daily lives. Despite having a meager sliver of the New York City population, the daily political transactions that transpire in the District of Columbia impact our lives. The comings and goings in the corridors of Congress are likely to have a…

    U.S. Top Court Rejects New Challenge to Obamacare

    January 20, 2016

    WASHINGTON (Reuters)—The U.S. Supreme Court, which delivered major rulings in 2012 and 2015 preserving President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law, on Tuesday declined to take up a new, long-shot challenge to Obamacare brought by an Iowa artist. The court turned away an appeal by Matt Sissel, who had asserted that the 2010 Affordable Care Act…

    Obamacare Ruling Ends Threat to U.S. Hospitals, Insurers

    June 27, 2015

    NEW YORK (Reuters)—The U.S. hospital and health insurance industries breathed a collective sigh of relief on Thursday after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld subsidies for individuals under President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law. Shares in hospitals surged, with several hitting all-time highs, on the expectation that patients would be able to continue paying for services….

    Most Americans Want Congress to Ensure Obamacare Subsidies

    June 16, 2015

    (Reuters)—A majority of Americans say Congress should make sure Obamacare subsidies to buy health insurance are available nationwide if the Supreme Court rules that the payments in at least 34 states are illegal, according to a poll released on Tuesday. The Kaiser Family Foundation poll surveyed 1,200 people from June 2 to June 9 in…

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences