In response to the government’s merits brief in the case of King v. Burwell, King et al., the petitioners, filed their Reply Brief (PRB.) on February 18th. In their brief, the petitioners declare, A “failure” to establish the Exchange obviously does not “fulfil[l]” the “requirement” to establish it; and an “Exchange established by the State” does not paradoxically result even when a state...
On Wednesday of next week, March 4th, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of King v. Burwell. The Court will determine whether federal tax credits are authorized under the Affordable Care Act for individuals enrolled in health plans through federally-operated Exchanges. An IRS Rule interpreting the Act says the tax credits are authorized by the Act; the petitioners, King...
What is the petitioners’ primary case built on? Two, definitional subsections that define the terms “premium assistance amount” and “coverage amount” in the tax-credit statute (26 U.S.C. § 36B), amended by section 1401 of the Affordable Care Act. Both subsections refer to qualified health plans “enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State….” The tax-credit statute...
In response to the government’s merits brief in the case of King v. Burwell, King et al., the petitioners, filed their Reply Brief (PRB.) on Wednesday of this past week, February 18th. In their brief, the petitioners declare, A “failure” to establish the Exchange obviously does not “fulfil[l]” the “requirement” to establish it; and an “Exchange established by the State” does not...