[drypowder]

Please correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the Supreme Court via Chief Justice John Roberts' unconstitutional act of rewording of the term fine to tax just so the ACA could be found constitutional thus basically nullifying the premise behind the JW challenge to the Obama administration for doing essentially the same thing which is changing the wording of the law post passage just to make it workable? Separate branches of government is the only difference but both are guilty of defrauding our constitutional law. If the Supreme Court finds against the Obama administration then it finds against itself.

[jazusamo]

I’m no legal beagle but I believe this is a different issue.

JW is supporting the plaintiffs in King vs. Burwell which challenges the subsidies allowed to people signing up in other than state exchanges.

In the ACA it specifically states subsidies will only be allowed to those signing up in state exchanges.