Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center
Corporate Accountability

What Leading Lawyers Made of the ‘King’ Arguments

By Marcia Coyle and Tony Mauro

 

Lawyers on all sides of the contentious debate over King v. Burwell attended the arguments Wednesday. Here are some first-blush reactions to what they saw and heard:

 

“The context of the whole law is essential to resolving this case, and that principle was made clear in today’s argument. If the court follows its own precedents that govern the reading of statutes, the Affordable Care Act’s tax credits should be available nationwide.

 

“Justice Kennedy’s questions underscored the federalism implications of a decision stripping individuals of tax credits. As our brief, as well as the brief filed by Virginia and more than 20 other states make clear, no state understood the ACA to operate in the way that the King plaintiffs argue at the time the statute was enacted. Argument this morning underscored the absurdity of the King plaintiffs’ interpretation of the ACA, which is less about the law and more about the ‘never-ending saga,’ as Justice Kagan put it, of opposition to Obamacare.”

 

—Elizabeth Wydra, chief counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center…

More from Corporate Accountability

Corporate Accountability
U.S. Supreme Court

Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T and Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission

In Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T and Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission, the Supreme Court is considering whether the FCC’s two-stage civil-enforcement process violates the Seventh Amendment.
Corporate Accountability
January 15, 2026

January Newsletter: CAC Keeps Up the Fight for Corporate Accountability
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Millennia Housing Management v. Department of Housing and Urban Development

In Millennia Housing Management v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is considering a challenge to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s authority to...
Corporate Accountability
July 2, 2025

Moneyed Interests Still Prevail at the Supreme Court (2024-2025 Term)

The Court Continues to Favor Corporations over Workers, Consumers, and the Environment.
By: Brian R. Frazelle, Ana Builes
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Novartis v. Secretary United States Department of Health and Human Services

In Novartis v. Secretary United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit considered whether the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare drug price negotiation program is an unconstitutional...
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Boehringer Ingelheim v. Department of Health and Human Services

In Boehringer Ingelheim v. Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit considered whether the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare drug price negotiation program is an unconstitutional taking...