Wednesday, the Supreme Court will entertain the latest challenge to Obamacare. If you can make it all the way through this post, you’re going to understand what’s going on way better than your neighbors. Added bonus: a significant detour through the jurisprudence of piscene spoliation, which you’ve no doubt all been anxiously awaiting.
James Hanley doubts the argument against subsidies for federal health care exchanges is bonkers.
The Ordinary Court’s majority moves on to the final issue left in the case, and issues its ruling.
Tim Kowal agrees the Greens have individual standing, but suggests the corporation is the appropriate party to assert their claims.
In Part III of the Ordinary Court’s treatment of the Hobby Lobby case, the Ordinary Justices’ voting pattern shifts, with dramatic results.
Part II of the opinion, dealing substantively with whether Hobby Lobby can state a claim for relief under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The first part of the Ordinary Court’s treatment of one of this year’s most-publicized legal cases. To begin, we must understand the factual and legal landscape.
Much of what we talk about when we talk about healthcare are the stories we choose to tell. Before we can solve this country’s healthcare crisis, it will be important for us to recognize this.
The US healthcare system is about to radically change, whether or not Obamacare stands. Exactly how it’s going to change, and the degree to which that change will be good or bad for the country, is a choice we still need to make. Before we can make that choice, however, we need to understand how we got here in the first place.