Scotus soon to hear the latest on the ACA

Should be interesting.  Will the SCOTUS rule as the law is written which denies subsidies to states without exchanges or will they rue on what the Dem's meant when the law was written.

1.  The plain text of the statute denies subsidies to people who live in states without an exchange. This reading is not absurd, because it creates a powerful incentive for states to create an exchange in the first place.

 2.  There was no split in the circuits — the lower courts actually seemed to accept the Obama administration’s misreading of its own law. If the Court agreed with the lower courts, or wasn’t sure about it, they could have just allowed the issue to further percolate (as the Justices themselves will often say when they pass on the opportunity to take a case). The grant of certiorari (which takes four Justices) only makes sense if a majority wants to overrule the lower courts quickly.

3.  The Court will be acting in agreement with, rather than against, majority wishes. The last election gives the court political cover to cut back on Obamacare. Given the election results, a majority of Americans support repeal or radical restructuring of Obamacare. If the Court rules against Obama here, it will be acting with the support of a majority of Congress.

Will the SCOTUS rule the subsidies are legal as invalidating the subsidy will affect millions of people?  But then again, they may actually rule on the law as written.