Obamacare: The Supreme Court will hear the case about Federal subsidies

Now that the individual mandate has been challenged in the court and upheld by the Supreme Court there is another challenge to the law which has been making it way through the court system and that is the issue about the Federal Exchange handing out subsidies.

The law clearly states that only State run exchanges can give out subsidies but the Federal exchange has been handing them out as well and that is where the problem lies. When this first came to light I thought it was a mistake and this provision was unintentional and could be blamed on the fact that nobody read the bill before they passed it, however it turns out that this was intentional and it was meant to force the states to set up their own exchanges.

The Supreme Court has now agreed to take up this case, here is more:

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear a new challenge to President Barack Obama’s health care law – a case that threatens subsidies that help millions of low- and middle-income people afford their health insurance premiums. The justices said they will review a federal appeals court ruling that upheld IRS 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. The case probably will be argued the first week in March, with a decision expected by late June.

If the Supreme Court reads the legislation–which is doubtful because during the original hearing where the mandate was upheld one of the conservative justices (I forget which one and I could not find a link) said he wouldn’t read the bill before deciding on the case–and if the Justices listen to the words of the Democrats admitting this was how the law was supposed to work it would seem to me they would have to strike down the Federal subsidies.

However, during the case on the mandate Chief Justice Roberts basically rewrote the law and determined that the mandate penalty was legal under the taxing provision in the Constitution even though the Obama regime argued that it was not a tax so all bets are off…