Remember Jonathan Gruber? Yeah, neither does the SCOTUS. Jonathan Gruber was the Obamacare architect that made it clear to everyone that would listen at the time of the law's passage and thereafter (at least until it became politically inconvenient) that the absence of subsidies through the federal exchange WAS A FEATURE not a bug of the law. See our coverage of Mr.
6-3 is not even close when it comes to the SCOTUS. Both Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy held that despite the language of the statute, subsidies are available through the federal exchange. I am sure there will be plenty of analysis to go around. The bottom line is that by this decision nothing has changed. "You can go about your business. Move along . . . move along."
Doug Schoen at Forbes.com thinks he has found a bit of insight in how SCOTUS will decide King v. Burwell. While we are all speculating, it is worth a read. His key points come from a decision released last week in which the justices sounded off on whether the objeective of a statute may supercede its text.