As reported by CNN, the Supreme Court upheld a key provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in stating that government subsidies toward the cost of individual health insurance should be available not only in states that have set up their own health insurance exchanges, but also in states where consumers rely on the federal government exchange.

In King v. Burwell, the court was interpreting a passage in the law that said tax credits are authorized for those who buy health insurance on marketplaces that are “established by the state.” While 16 states have set up their own health insurance exchanges, 6.4 million people were receiving subsidies in the 34 states that had not set up their own exchanges. Those consumers stood to lose their subsidies, worth about $1.7 billion a month.

Income-based subsidies average $272 per month.

By a 6-3 vote, a divided court affirmed an Internal Revenue Service ruling that the subsidies should be available not only in states that have set up their own health insurance exchanges, but also in states where consumers rely on the federal government exchange.

“Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote.

Roberts was joined by Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Opposing the decision were Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Contact your NEEBCo representative with questions on ACA and individual subsidy eligibility.

Click here to read the Supreme Court’s opinion.