⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Fourth Circuit hears a dispute over federal changes to Affordable Care Act insurance marketplaces. These are exchanges where people buy individual health coverage, with eligible buyers receiving tax credits to help pay premiums. The 2025 rule would shorten open enrollment, tighten verification for financial assistance, and widen the permitted variation in how much a health plan covers. Cities challenging the rule say it would leave more residents uninsured and increase costs for care that patients cannot pay for. A district court rejected several parts of the rule, and the government now asks the Fourth Circuit to reverse that judgment. The government will argue these are lawful policy choices, and courts should not demand perfect data. The opening issue is standing: a concrete injury, traceable to the challenged action, that a favorable ruling would likely remedy. You will also hear about actuarial value: the average share of covered medical costs a plan is designed to pay, not that percentage of every patient's bill. The statute permits de minimis, or very small, variations; the lawyers disagree about the discretion that leaves the agency. Other disputes concern advance tax-credit payments after a failure to reconcile earlier credits, and extra time to resolve income discrepancies. The judges must consider both what the statute authorizes and whether the agency gave a reasoned explanation for its choices.

City of Columbus v. Robert Kennedy, Jr. (No. 26-1938) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, argued October 30, 2026.