In 2015, the University of Miami Business Law Review hosted its first online symposium to discuss the potential ramifications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the then pending matter, King v. Burwell.
In King, the Court considered whether the Internal Revenue Service may permissibly promulgate regulations to extend tax-credit subsidies to coverage purchased through exchanges established by the federal government under Section 1321 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. If the Court held that the relevant federal tax credits are unconstitutional, millions of Americans would be at risk of losing their healthcare coverage. King was argued before the Supreme Court on March 4, 2015, and the decision is expected in June 2015.
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 (ONLINE SYMPOSIUM)
Masthead
University of Miami Administration and Faculty
University of Miami Statement of Editorial Policy
Table of Contents
Essays
Timothy Stoltzfus Jost & James Engstrand, Anomalies in the Affordable Care Act that Arise from Reading the Phrase “Exchange Established by the State” Out of Context, 23 U. Miami Bus. L. Rev. 249 (2015).
Ronald D. Rotunda, King v. Burwell and the Rise of the Administrative State, 23 U. Miami Bus. L. Rev. 267 (2015).
Antonio F. Perez, The Subsidy Question in King v. Burwell: A Federalist Response to Crony Capitalism, 23 U. Miami Bus. L. Rev. 283 (2015).
Tom Miller, Unfair Coercion, or Greater Deference? Two New Sides of King v. Burwell, 23 U. Miami Bus. L. Rev. 297 (2015).
Sarah Helene Duggin, From the New Deal to the New Healthcare: A New Deal Perspective on King v. Burwell and the Crusade Against the Affordable Care Act, 23 U. Miami Bus. L. Rev. 317 (2015).
