<b><i>BREAKING NEWS:</b></i> Health Care Law Subsidies Survive Supreme Court Challenge

The'ruling'was the second time in three years that the high court prevented the complete unraveling of the Obama presidency's signature legislative achievement: the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

In'King v. Burwell, the 6-3 majority, led by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., held that the health care act does not limit the subsidies, or tax credits, for health policies purchased on exchanges created only by states. The Internal Revenue Service, charged with administering the subsidies, was correct when it interpreted language in the act to make those subsidies available as well to purchases on exchanges set up by the federal government, said the majority.

'Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,' Roberts wrote. 'If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter. Section 36B can fairly be read consistent with what we see as Congress's plan, and that is the reading we adopt.'

Health care and insurance experts had predicted that a defeat for the government would have devastating effects for the law's goal of making health insurance affordable to as many Americans as possible. A RAND study found that “in scenarios in which the tax credits are eliminated, our model predicts a near 'death spiral' with very sharp premium increases and drastic declines in individual market enrollment.”