http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/when-scotus-decides-as-ob_b_6138854.html
But, when the Court denies millions of people their health care subsidies, they will also be putting an end to hundreds of millions of dollars of dark money that is infecting our elections. And, likely much else in our regulatory and tax system.
At stake in King is whether a federal agency can interpret a statute in the context of the entire law, or whether it must strictly adhere to the specific words of one sentence. Section 1331 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka, "Obamacare"

authorizes tax credits for insurance purchased on an exchange "established by the State under section 1311". Plaintiffs assert that that does not authorize tax credits for insurance purchased on an exchange established by the federal government.
..................... snip
But, when the Supreme Court rules, as they surely will, in King that "state exchanges" means only "state" exchanges, and the default federal exchange was established only to provide for those who could already afford health insurance, it follows as the night the day, that "exclusively" in the IRS code can mean just one thing: 100% social welfare promotion. Hence, gone is the tax-exempt status, gone is donor anonymity, gone is dark money for the entire organization if even $1 is spent on political activities.
.............snip
nce donor anonymity is gone, it is difficult to imagine how it will ever return. Sure, the right-wing will freak-out, the Koch Boys will demand Congress act (after all, they own it), but this is one where the President will surely veto it. It is hard to imagine Democrats, who were just beaten to a pulp by the scurrilous ads funded by this dark money, would help the Koch Boys override that veto.
By contrast, there will be a lot of incentives in states, even those controlled by the radical right wing, to provide at least a link to the federal exchanges, so its citizens do not lose their health care tax credits.