Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

King v. Burwell

United States Supreme Court
135 S. Ct. 2480 (2015)


Facts

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided tax credits to lower-income individuals for use in purchasing health insurance. The ACA directed each state to establish an exchange from which such insurance would be purchased. The ACA provided that if a state did not establish an exchange, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) would establish and operate an exchange in the state. The ACA stated that individuals would be entitled to the tax credits for insurance plans “enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State.” The ACA directed the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to promulgate rules and regulations to implement the tax-credit program. The IRS promulgated a regulation stating that individuals enrolled in exchange insurance plans established either by a state or HHS were entitled to the tax credits. King (plaintiff) brought suit, challenging the IRS’s regulation on the ground that it was contrary to the terms of the ACA, which provided that only individuals enrolled through a state-created exchange would be entitled to tax credits. Granting Chevron deference to the IRS’s interpretation of the ACA, the court of appeals upheld the IRS regulation providing tax credits for insurance obtained through an HHS exchange. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Scalia, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.