High Court To Hear Challenge To Health Law Subsidies

Bloomberg: Challenge to Obamacare Gets U.S. Supreme Court Review
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a challenge to the subsidies that are a linchpin of President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul, accepting a case that suddenly puts the law under a new legal cloud. Two years after upholding much of the law by a single vote, the justices today said they will hear a Republican-backed appeal targeting tax credits that have helped more than 4 million people afford insurance. (Stohr, 11/7)

The Washington Post: Supreme Court Will Hear Newest Challenge To Affordable Care Act
The justices decided to review an appeals court decision that upheld an Obama administration decision to extend tax subsidies to those who purchased health insurance through exchanges established by the federal government. The challengers argue that according to the wording of the statute, the subsidies should only extend to those in states that had established their own exchanges. (Barnes, 11/7)

The Wall Street Journal: Supreme Court To Hear Case On Health Law Subsidies
The move puts before the high court one of several cases over the subsidies. The justices accepted a challenge from Virginia that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., had rejected. The Fourth Circuit in July found in favor of an Internal Revenue Service rule extending tax credits to lower-income Americans who purchase coverage through the federal insurance exchange. (Bravin, 11/7)

Los Angeles Times: Supreme Court To Again Decide Fate Of Obama's Healthcare Law
The conservative group that has brought the case now before the high court argues that such an arrangement is illegal. They maintain that the Affordable Care Act, as written, allows the government to subsidize health insurance only in the states that have set up their own insurance exchanges. ... Administration lawyers and the Democratic lawmakers who sponsored the law have called the argument absurd. They say the law intended to provide insurance subsidies nationwide, regardless of whether it was bought through a federal or state exchange. (Savage, 11/7)

The New York Times: Supreme Court To Hear New Challenge To Health Law
The case, King v. Burwell, No. 14-114, concerns tax subsidies that are central to the operation of the health care law. According to the challengers, those subsidies are not available in the states that have decided not to run the marketplaces for insurance coverage known as exchanges. Under the law, the federal government has stepped in to run exchanges in those states. ... The central question in the case is what to make of a provision in the law limiting subsidies to “an exchange established by the state.” (Liptak, 11/7)

Reuters: U.S. Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Obamacare Subsidies Case
In a one-sentence order, the court said it would decide a case brought by conservative challengers to the law. The plaintiffs appealed a July ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the subsidies. The nine justices will issue a ruling by the end of June. (Hurley, 11/7)

The Hill: Supreme Court To Hear Healthcare Law Challenge
If the high court rules against the premium credits, it would gut a core component of the law that’s already gone into effect for more than 4 million people in the U.S. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the administration continued "to have high confidence in the legal argument" that the subsidies were being distributed correctly. (Ferris, 11/7)

Politico: Supreme Court To Hear Obamacare Subsidies Case
The move was a huge surprise since only one appeals court has ruled against the Obama administration on the issue. Since then, the same panel has said that it would re-hear the case in December. A Supreme Court ruling against the Obama administration would severely limit the reach of the subsidies, which is considered one of the law’s key benefits. (Haberkorn, 11/7)

National Journal: The Supreme Court Really Might Destroy Obamacare This Time
If the challenge succeeds, the consequences for Obamacare would be dramatic: Costs would skyrocket for millions of consumers, likely causing many of them to drop their coverage. The law's central goal—expanding health insurance to low-income Americans—would be severely set back, and at least some of the law's new insurance markets could become unsustainable. The lawsuit says that subsidies, which are available on a sliding scale based on household income, should be available only in states that set up their own insurance exchanges. The challengers point to a section in the law that refers to subsidies flowing through "an exchange established by the state," which, they argue, is a sign that Congress wanted to limit financial assistance to state-based exchanges. (BAker, 11/7)

The Associated Press: Supreme Court Agrees To Hear New Challenge To Obamacare
The justices on Friday say they will decide whether the law authorizes subsidies that help millions of low- and middle-income people afford their health insurance premiums. A federal appeals court upheld Internal Revenue Service regulations that allow health-insurance tax credits under the Affordable Care Act for consumers in all 50 states. Opponents argue that most of the subsidies are illegal. (11/7)

NPR: Supreme Court Will Hear Case Challenging Obamacare Subsidies
At issue is the language Congress used when it passed the health care law. The Supreme Court will decide whether Congress intended to provide subsidies for Americans who bought insurance through exchanges set up by states and the federal government on behalf of states. The Supreme Court, here is trying to settle disagreement between lower courts, which have issued conflicting rulings on the question. (Peralta, 11/7)

USA Today: Supreme Court Will Hear New Case Challenging Obamacare
The decision to hear the case without waiting for a split among federal appeals courts represents a major victory for opponents, who had lost a unanimous verdict at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. The justices agreed without comment to reconsider that ruling, which upheld the law's system of subsidizing the insurance policies it requires. That's a setback for the administration and proponents of Obamacare, but it is not the final word. (Wolf, 11/7)