Â鶹ŮÓÅ

If the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act’s tax credits in most of the country, governors firmly expect the next move is Washington’s. The governors, in town for the National Governors Association winter meeting, say the issue is a top focus at their conference and will be high on the list of topics when they meet Monday with President Barack Obama. (Radnofsky and Hook, 2/22)

The Supreme Court this June could cut off millions of Americans from affordable Obamacare coverage. The response from the nation’s governors gathering in Washington this week was an assortment of shrugs. POLITICO interviewed more than a dozen governors, from both parties, this weekend at the National Governors Association winter meeting. Most said they’re in a wait-and-see zone. (Cheney, Wheaton and Pradhan, 2/22)

And one thing was clear this weekend as the nation's governors gathered in Washington: Many of the states that could be affected [if the Supreme Court strikes down the health law subsidies] are not prepared for the potential fallout. In rounds of interviews at the National Governors Association's winter meeting, several governors indicated they could do little about the estimated 8 million people who could drop coverage if they were to lose health insurance subsidies later this year. (Peoples, 2/22)

Governors in states across the country have begun pressuring Congressional leaders and making contingency plans in case the Supreme Court decides that millions of people who get subsidies to pay for health care under the Affordable Care Act are unconstitutional. ... Governors of those 34 states [that could lose federal funding for subsidies], even the Republicans who oppose the Affordable Care Act, say they are concerned at the chaos that could ensue if the court rules the federal subsidies unconstitutional. (Wilson, 2/21)

With a Supreme Court decision on health-insurance subsidies on the horizon, U.S. governors are bracing themselves, weighing what states that opted for a federal health-insurance marketplace under President Barack Obama's health-care overhaul might do if a ruling were to affect subsidies in those states. ... Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper, chairman of the NGA, said that one question that governors are asking is whether states that run their own marketplaces can cover residents of other states. "This is new ground,'' said Hickenlooper, a Democrat who opted for a state marketplace. "I don’t think anyone understands exactly what the alternatives are, depending on how the ruling comes." (Niquette, 2/21)

Millions of people could lose health insurance subsidies in the coming months if the Supreme Court sides with opponents of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. (2/22)

Since the Supreme Court accepted the case for argument, the plaintiffs are long shots no more, and a major legal battle has erupted among outside forces armed only with amicus curiae, or friend of the court, briefs. Critics of the law coordinated their briefs, as did supporters of the Obama administration, to a lesser degree. And those dueling briefs could have consequences, said Anthony J. Franze, a lawyer at Arnold & Porter in Washington who systematically reviews amicus curiae briefs filed with the Supreme Court. (Pear, 2/21)

Sometimes the plaintiffs in Supreme Court cases are carefully selected and thoroughly vetted. Sometimes they come out of nowhere to become important symbols of justice. ... But if you’ve read anything about David King, Douglas Hurst, Brenda Levy or Rose Luck, the four Virginians at the heart of the latest challenge to Obamacare that the Supreme Court will hear early next month, it is likely to have been about whether they are qualified to be in court. (Barnes, 2/22)

Republican efforts to replace the federal health law have been given new urgency by the Supreme Court. As soon as this spring, the court could invalidate health insurance subsidies available to millions of Americans if it rules for the challengers in a case called King v. Burwell. ... But as the party that controls Congress, some Republicans also fear the potential for a backlash if they don’t have a plan to help those who would effectively be stripped of coverage, many of whom are voters in Republican-led states. (Rovner, 2/23)