By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
Health Works CollectiveHealth Works CollectiveHealth Works Collective
  • Health
    • Mental Health
  • Policy and Law
    • Global Healthcare
    • Medical Ethics
  • Medical Innovations
  • News
  • Wellness
  • Tech
Search
© 2023 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
Reading: King v. Burwell: A Frivolous Lawsuit
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
Health Works CollectiveHealth Works Collective
Font ResizerAa
Search
Follow US
  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
© 2023 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
Health Works Collective > Policy & Law > Global Healthcare > King v. Burwell: A Frivolous Lawsuit
Global HealthcareHealth ReformPolicy & LawPublic Health

King v. Burwell: A Frivolous Lawsuit

DavidEWilliams
DavidEWilliams
Share
2 Min Read
SHARE
What do you think will happen to Obamacare if I press this button?

What do you think will happen to Obamacare if I press this button?

What do you think will happen to Obamacare if I press this button?

What do you think will happen to Obamacare if I press this button?

Some are surprised that Chief Justice John Roberts came out so strongly for the government in King v. Burwell, the lawsuit that aimed to bar insurance subsidies from Obamacare exchanges run by the federal government.

I’m not a lawyer or Supreme Court scholar but to me Roberts’ stance isn’t surprising at all. King v. Burwell was a joke –an exemplar of the type of “frivolous lawsuit” some on the right are so fond of citing. Roberts wants the Court to be taken seriously both now and in retrospect, so this was an easy decision.

Let’s face it:

  • Congress’s intent was clear –to provide subsidies regardless of the mechanism a state chose to implement its exchange
  • There was no discussion by anyone at the time of drafting about any difference in subsidization on state v. federal exchanges
  • Every state –including those led by Obamacare foes, interpreted the law the way Congress intended
  • The legal argument was the result of opponents sifting through the minutiae of the law to find any argument that might be used against it
  • The plaintiffs –if they even understand the argument– have not been harmed by the law

Frankly, it’s hard to take the consenting Justices seriously.

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

—

By healthcare business consultant David E. Williams, president of Health Business Group.

TAGGED:ACAHealthcarehealthcare lawobamacaresupreme court
Share This Article
Facebook Copy Link Print
Share

Stay Connected

1.5KFollowersLike
4.5KFollowersFollow
2.8KFollowersPin
136KSubscribersSubscribe

Latest News

a person putting a bandage on a woman s head
The Long-Term Health Consequences of Untreated Personal Injuries
Health care
July 17, 2026
medicare mistakes seniors usually make
The Hidden Healthcare Costs Seniors Should Plan For
Global Healthcare Senior Care
July 15, 2026
The Complex Reality of Medication Management During Recovery
The Complex Reality of Medication Management During Recovery
Addiction Recovery
July 15, 2026
exercise benefits
How Exercise Shapes The Teenage Body And Mind
Infographics
July 12, 2026

You Might also Like

Health care

“Will I Need Long-Term Care?” – Details About Long-Term Care Insurance

December 23, 2019

Should We Care If Doctors Drop Medicare?

August 2, 2013
FinanceHealth ReformHospital AdministrationPolicy & LawPublic Health

The Meaning and Depth of the Primary Care Crisis

March 25, 2014

American Academy of Pediatrics Steps in False Statements Made During GOP Debate that Stated HPV Vaccine Causes Mental Retardation: American Academy of Pediatrics Steps In

September 14, 2011
Subscribe
Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Follow US
© 2008-2026 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?