[Sacajaweau]

So the object was to have states pick up the tab for the subsidies?

The wording of the law is not ambiguous.

[17th Miss Regt]

That would invalidate an Internal Revenue Service regulation that tried to sort out confusing wording in the law by concluding that Congress intended for consumers in all 50 states to have subsidized coverage.

There is nothing confusing about the wording unless you are a liberal looking to make sure that Obamacare goes forward regardless of what the law says. This 4th Circuit Court judge is one of those.