Excerpt
GWEN IFILL (NewsHour): Now conflicting court rulings on the health care law.
The federal court of appeals based in Washington ruled today that the law doesn’t allow policy holders who get their insurance through the federal exchange to qualify for subsidies that would reduce the cost. But a separate ruling, issued hours later by a federal appeals court in Richmond, said those getting policies through the federal exchanges do qualify for the subsidies.
The rulings come down to different interpretations of the same passage of the law. Congress said if a state didn’t create its own insurance exchange, the federal government should. But the law also reads that subsidies be provided by — quote — “an exchange established by the state.”
Just 14 states, plus the District of Columbia, created their own exchanges. Five million enrollees now receive subsidies through the federal exchange.
So, what do these conflicting rulings mean for the future of the health care law?
For that, we turn to Julie Rovner of Kaiser Health News and Tom Goldstein, founder of SCOTUSblog.com.
Let’s go back to the root of this challenge, Julie. Why did this come up?
No comments:
Post a Comment