"The King case involves more than the legal issue of the degree of deference that courts should afford to administrative agencies when interpreting the words used in a statute. The Court's decision in King will have real consequences for insurers, employers and millions of people.... Likewise, insurers who offer products on federally-established Exchanges could potentially be deprived of billions of dollars in premium dollars that they expected to receive for coverage sold on such Exchanges.... Additionally, if the Court rules that subsidies for coverage obtained through a federally-established Exchange are not available, the ACA's employer mandate penalty would not apply to large employers with full-time employees who obtain coverage through federal Exchanges." [King v. Burwell, No. 14-1158 (4th Cir. July 22, 2014; cert. pet. granted Nov. 7, 2014, argued Mar. 4, 2015)]

MORE >>