The man behind the Obamacare lawsuit that will be decided by the Supreme Court, which could remove a critical component of the healthcare law, is a vocal opponent of President Barack Obama and his signature healthcare law.
"So do you think NSA, FBI and the other three letter government workers watch face book?" lead plaintiff David King wrote on his Facebook page on Oct. 8, 2013. "Just wonder because if they do I’ll have a house full of them soon. I guess we will be able to enjoy a cold beer and make fun of the idiot in the White House. I sued the irs over this bull **** so … get ready."
King is one of four plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit against the Obama administration, naming Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Matthews Burwell, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and IRS Commissioner John Koskinen as defendants along with their respective federal agencies in what is known as King v. Burwell.
Politico contends that come March, when the Supreme Court will hear both sides of the case, King will become the face of the Obamacare opposition, describing King as someone who "hates Obama [and] Obamacare."
Sam Kazman of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which is the organization that is "coordinating and funding" the lawsuit told Politico that "this case is about the IRS illegally rewriting the law.
"It’s not about anyone’s political beliefs or what is on their Facebook page," Kazman added. "Our plaintiffs simply want their day in court."
King told Politico that "the Supreme Court is taking the case, so they obviously feel it has merit."
When asked about the comments from his Facebook page, he said "everyone is entitled to an opinion."
The lawsuit challenges whether or not the Obama administration can legally give tax subsidies to those who purchase health insurance through the federally run healthcare exchange, HealthCare.gov, saying that such subsidies were really only intended for those buying plans from state-run exchanges.
They make their claim based on a phrase in the Affordable Care Act, which says that subsidies will be provide through an "exchange established by the state."
This means that individuals in the 34 states without their own health insurance marketplaces cannot receive subsidies, the lawsuit argues.
The plaintiffs want to be able to opt out of the individual mandate and don't want the government subsidies either. All of the plaintiffs have incomes that are low enough that they do qualify for subsidies under Obamacare.
The Supreme Court announced in November that it will hear the case.