Liberals were quick to dismiss as judicial activism the federal appeals court ruling declaring subsidies on federal health insurance exchanges illegal, but few have actually taken the time to explain why the judges ruled the way they did.

Ultimately, the 2-1 decision in Halbig v. Burwell written by Thomas Griffith and joined by Raymond Randolph hinged on two basic conclusions. One, the plain meaning of the words in President Obama‘s health care law — “an Exchange established by the State” — is that subsidies are only available for individuals living in states that have established their own exchanges (which means fourteen states plus the District of Columbia). Two, there is no evidence from the legislative record that justifies deviating from the plain meaning of the law.