“Arguments Against Health Law Subsidies Gain Traction”: Robert Pear will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times.
Bloomberg News reports that “Obamacare Subsidies Face Skeptical Appeals Court Judges.”
At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Jenna Greene has a post titled “D.C. Circuit Skeptical of Affordable Care Act Subsidies.”
And in commentary, today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times contains an editorial titled “Unfair to Obamacare: Another ill-advised legal challenge; The latest lawsuit shows just how far opponents will go to undermine a law they cannot abide.”
At The Washington Post’s “Wonkblog,” Jason Millman has a post titled “Are Obamacare subsidies now in jeopardy?”
Online at The New Republic, Alec MacGillis has an essay titled “Forget Hobby Lobby: The Bigger Legal Threat to Obamacare Still Has Life.”
And online at USA Today, Michael F. Cannon has an essay titled “Hobby Lobby isn’t today’s most important case: Halbig v. Sebelius could force Obama administration to follow its own law.”
“Court backs S.F.’s gun storage law, hollow-point bullet ban”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has this news update.
Maura Dolan of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Appeals court upholds San Francisco laws regulating gun ownership.”
And at her “Trial Insider” blog, Pamela A. MacLean has a post titled “Handgun Lock-up Law, Bullet Sales Limits Upheld.”
You can access today’s ruling of a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at this link.
“Federal appeals court extends freeze on Michigan gay marriages”: The Detroit Free Press has this news update reporting on an order that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.
And The Detroit News has an update headlined “Appeals Court extends stay in gay marriage case until arguments heard.”
“Harper says he will ‘respect’ Supreme Court’s blocking of Nadon”: The Toronto Globe and Mail has this news update.
“Federal court says Obamacare built on quicksand”: Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times has a news update that begins, “A federal appeals court seemed skeptical Tuesday of the Obama administration’s position that it can give Obamacare subsidies to Americans regardless of what kind of exchange they are in, in a case that could threaten the fundamental deal underpinning the Affordable Care Act.”
Update: You can access at this link (40.1MB mp3 audio file) the audio of today’s D.C. Circuit oral argument in Halbig v. Sebelius, No. 14-5018.
“Court Hears Arguments in Contraception Coverage Challenge”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news update.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post has a news update headlined “Supreme Court divided as it hears argument on contraceptive coverage.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times has a news update headlined “Justices sound ready to reject contraceptives mandate under Obamacare.”
Richard Wolf of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court seeks compromise in contraception case.”
Tom Howell Jr. of The Washington Time has a news update headlined “Female Supreme Court justices worry about corporations using religious objections to duck rules.”
At “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” Marcia Coyle has a post titled “Justices, Divided, Appear to Favor Religious Claims in Contraception Case.”
And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Argument recap: One hearing, two dramas.”
You can access at this link the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354.
“Defending traditional marriage is defending the state constitution”: Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette has this essay online today at The Detroit Free Press.
“High court seems divided over birth control rule”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report.
Lawrence Hurley and David Ingram of Reuters report that “Supreme Court sharply divided on Obamacare religious challenge.”
And Greg Stohr and Sophia Pearson of Bloomberg News report that “Obamacare Contraceptive Rule Questioned at U.S. High Court.”
“Live Blog: Contraception Cases at Supreme Court.” Brent Kendall has this post at WSJ.com’s “Washington Wire” blog.
“Gupta’s Insider Conviction Tied to Rajaratnam Upheld”: Bloomberg News has this report.
And Jonathan Stempel of Reuters reports that “Ex-Goldman director Gupta’s insider trading conviction upheld.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link.
Access online today’s rulings in argued cases of the U.S. Supreme Court: The Court today issued rulings in two argued cases.
1. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court (with Justice Elena Kagan recused) in United States v. Quality Stores, Inc., No. 12-1408. You can access the oral argument via this link.
2. And Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., No. 12-873. You can access the oral argument via this link.
In early news coverage, The Associated Press has a report headlined “Court: Company can move forward with Lexmark suit.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Severance Payments Can Be Taxed, U.S. Supreme Court Rules.”
And Lawrence Hurley and Patrick Temple-West report that “Supreme Court rules severance payments are taxable.”
“Hobby Lobby Contraceptive Case Goes Before Supreme Court”: Nina Totenberg had this audio segment on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition.”
Stephanie Condon of CBS News reports that “Supreme Court Hobby Lobby case revisits divisive political issues.”
This morning’s broadcast of C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” contained a segment titled “Supreme Court Case on Birth Control Coverage” featuring Lawrence Hurley of Reuters.
In commentary, today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times contains an editorial titled “Hobby Lobby case: Defenders of religious freedom should be careful what they pray for; The Supreme Court should reject the argument of some for-profit firms that they be allowed to opt out of Obamacare’s mandate on contraception coverage.”
And online at Reuters, Jay Michaelson has an essay titled “Why corporations don’t deserve religious freedom.”
In coverage of the Conestoga Wood case from the Intelligencer Journal/Lancaster (Pa.) New Era: Today’s newspaper contains front page articles headlined “Conestoga Wood vs. Obamacare: Questions and answers” and “Law professors debate significance of Conestoga Wood ruling.”
And the newspaper also contains articles headlined “Meet the major legal players in the Conestoga Wood Specialties Supreme Court case” and “Legal precedents: 5 cases that may shape Conestoga Wood outcome.”
“Obamacare Subsidies Seen as Illegal on State Exchanges”: Bloomberg News has this report on a case being argued today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
In other coverage, The Detroit News reports that “Schuette argues for cutting federal health tax credits for Michiganians.”
At the “Wonkblog” of The Washington Post, Jason Millman has an entry titled “The contraception case is big, but another challenge could really hurt Obamacare.”
And at “ThinkProgress,” Ian Millhiser has a post titled “How Two Republican Judges Could Blow Up Obamacare Tomorrow.”
When the audio of today’s D.C. Circuit oral argument becomes available online, I will provide a link to it.
