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

Veneers vs. Crowns vs. Bonding: Understanding Cosmetic Options
Veneers vs. Crowns vs. Bonding: Understanding Cosmetic Options
Dental health Specialties
June 23, 2026
dental implants
Dental Implants and Quality of Life: What the Outcomes Data Shows
Dental health Specialties
June 23, 2026
Why Outpatient Addiction Treatment Works Better Than Most People Expect
Addiction Addiction Recovery
June 20, 2026
grief affects brain
How Grief Affects The Brain And Body
Infographics Mental Health
June 19, 2026

You Might also Like

Health careTechnology

Data Mining And Healthcare: How Treatment Can Be Improved By Data Collection

February 20, 2020

What Can We Learn from the UK Health System?

January 22, 2015
Community Pharmacy Accreditation
BusinessFinanceHealth ReformPolicy & LawPublic Health

URAC Expands Pharmacy Accreditation Options: Community Pharmacy

May 17, 2014
medications-cure-tablets-pharmacy-56612.jpeg
Policy & Law

Using Digital Technologies to Solve Pharma’s Cost of Care Crisis

July 9, 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?