Also fundamental of judicial review is the separation of powers model. The separation of powers model should trump interpretation because the text itself is not ambiguous and the executive interpretation is diametrically opposed to the text. Letting the exective get away with interpreting legislative black as white or vice versa sets a very bad precedent. Not to mention that the Obama Administration is inconsistent in its own interpretation of the term “state” as used in the ACA if it holds in Halbig that the State means the federal government; see here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3183830/posts?page=10#10
so according to the Obama administration, black is deemed to be white in defiance of the plain text of the law, except when the administration deems black to be black. Or to be more precise, the IRS can hold that black is white while HHS can hold that black is black, and the courts should agree with the executive on both, and furthermore, establish that as case law precedent... hmm, what could possibly go wrong?
In the summer of 2010, IRS officials began working on rules to implement the PPACA’s premium-assistance tax credits. Like the statute itself, early drafts of their regulations reflected the requirement that tax-credit recipients must be enrolled in health insurance through an Exchange “established by the State under section 1311.”