Most of the conversation about the King v Burwell case has focused on which states would be affected, what would happen to insurance markets, or how many people would become uninsured as a result. But there’s one thing almost no one is talking about: how the decision might affect children’s coverage and why it’s another reason why we need to continue to fund the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for the foreseeable future.

Here’s more on how King v Burwell could affect children’s coverage:

• Up to 795,000 children – who are enrolled in marketplace coverage thhealthcare.gov platform – could be directly affected by King v. Burwell. According to HHS, nine percent of those enrolled in the marketplace using healthcare.gov platform were children ages 0 to 17 as of the first month of the second open enrollment period on December 15, 2014. If we extend that percentage out to the 8.84 million people now enrolled in the marketplace through healthcare.gov platform, we are looking at up to 795,000 children in states where a decision in King v. Burwell might directly apply by taking away subsidies for marketplace coverage. (Note, that federal marketplace states directly affected by King v. Burwell might be a slightly smaller list of states than those that use the healthcare.gov platform, because a small number of states have established based exchanges but are using healthcare.gov for enrollment purposes.)

• 500,000 children could be indirectly affected by the decision by losing Medicaid and CHIP coverage. A recent Urban Institute analysis noted that Medicaid and CHIP enrollment would be about 500,000 lower without tax credits and cost-sharing reductions. Many children eligible for Medicaid or CHIP have parents eligible for marketplace tax credits under the current implementation. According to the Urban Institute, without tax credits, fewer parents would seek marketplace coverage and, as a result, fewer children would be screened for and enrolled in public insurance. This is no surprise, given that we know that expanding coverage for parents reduces the number of uninsured children.

We won’t know the result of the Supreme Court’s decision in King v Burwell until June at the earliest, and that is dangerously close to September, when CHIP funding will expire if it is not renewed by Congress. The uncertainty around King v. Burwell and the instability it could cause to our coverage landscape is one more reason we need CHIP refunded quickly to protect our nation’s gains in children’s coverage!