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

grief affects brain
How Grief Affects The Brain And Body
Infographics Mental Health
June 19, 2026
The Difference Between a Sustainable NP Practice and One That Burns Out in Three Years
The Difference Between a Sustainable NP Practice and One That Burns Out in Three Years
Career Nursing
June 19, 2026
medical facilites
Understanding Navigation Stress In Medical Facilities
Health Infographics
June 19, 2026
appointment ready
Appointment Ready: A Practical Patient Intake Preparation Guide
Hospital Administration Infographics
June 19, 2026

You Might also Like

Many of the ACA Quality-Enhancing Ideas Have Previously Failed

September 15, 2011
measles vaccine
Policy & LawPublic Health

Measles Vaccine: A Right to Refuse Treatment

February 25, 2015

Health Insurance for Pets?

May 5, 2011

Remote Heath: The Wave of our Medical Future

April 18, 2016
Subscribe
Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Follow US
© 2008-2025 HealthWorks Collective. All Rights Reserved.
  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?