The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 opinion upheld the provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) that allowed funding premium subsidies through both federally funded and state funded exchanges. The interpretation of the word “State” was cited in Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion and was interpreted to mean any exchange. This means that there will be no change in the law as a result of the case and employers and individuals will proceed as they have over the last 5 years by implementing and complying with the law. In the dissenting opinion authored by Justice Scalia he said “that this law should now be called SCOTUS CARE”. Speculation says he has said this because of the way the court has interpreted arguments and words in the law both in 2012 and now. In both situations the Court has set the precedent. If the Supreme Court likes the law but not the wording they have freedom to redefine the words or introduce non-argued arguments to provide their desired interpretation.