Whether you are in favor of or opposed to the Affordable Care Act (ACA or "Obamacare"), this past summer the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of a key provision of the Act, upholding a provision authorizing the payment of insurance subsidies to individuals who enrolled under the ACA through the federal insurance exchange. The provision at issue in the case of King v. Burwell, was upheld in a 6-3 decision written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. King v. Burwell and Subsidies under Obamacare King dealt with a portion of the ACA that offered subsidies to any eligible person who enrolled in a healthcare plan through “an Exchange established by the State.”

The plaintiffs argued that, as enrollees in a federal exchange, they were not entitled to the subsidies based on the express language of the law, itself, which provided subsidies only to those enrolling through a State sponsored exchange. While it may seem as if the plaintiffs in King were arguing against their own self-interests by asserting that they did not qualify for the subsidies, in fact, they did not want to receive the subsidies because they did not want to have to enroll for any health care plan at all, and without the subsidies, they would have fallen under an ACA financial exception, allowing them to opt out of enrolling for coverage, altogether.

Earlier this month the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in King vs. Burwell, which challenges the payment of insurance subsidies to health insurance enrollees under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

A Brief Intro to the Affordable Care Act

One of the major provisions of the ACA requires citizens to sign up for health insurance. For individuals who cannot get insurance through an employer, the ACA established healthcare exchanges, which allow people to shop for the insurance plan that best suits their needs and their budget. For those living in states that opted not to create their own healthcare exchange (34 did not), insurance may be purchased on the federal exchange.