Monday round-up

As the Court enters the final two weeks before its summer recess, coverage continues to focus on the challenge to the Affordable Care Act.

At CNN, Bill Mears has an overview of the issues in the case, while at theWashington Post,Robert Barnes reports on a study that analyzes how frequently each Justice asked questions challenging or defending the law. Other coverage centers on anticipation of, and possible reactions to, the Courts impending ruling: PoliticosTim Mak reports that the anxious conservative activists [who] gathered at the annual RightOnline bloggers conference this weekend expressed fear that the Court with the vote of Justice Anthony Kennedy will uphold the ACA, while Linda Feldmann of theChristian Science Monitorand David Espo of theAssociated Pressreport on plans by both political parties in advance of the ruling. In theWashington Times, Paige Winfield Cunningham looks at the effect that a decision invalidating the individual mandate might have on the rest of the law, while Robert Pear of theNew York Timesreports on the rulings potential implications for Medicaid.

Commentators also continue to weigh in on the case and its possible consequences. At the Room for Debatepage of The New York Times, contributors discuss the future of the ACA and health care if the individual mandate is invalidated, while in an op-ed for theWall Street Journal (subscription required), former health insurance CEO Ron Williams explains why he no longer supports the individual mandate. Washington Postcolumnist Robert J. Samuelson contends that President Obama committed a colossal error of judgment in making health-care reform a centerpiece of his first term, while atPolitico, Tom Daschle argues that health insurance isnt like broccoli.

Finally, in a speech on Friday at the American Constitution Society convention, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg alluded to the prospect of sharp disagreement at the Court in the coming weeks. CNNs Bill Mears has coverage, as do Politicos Kyle Cheney and theAssociated Press.

Campaign finance issues also continue to make news. At theBlog of the Legal Times, Todd Ruger reports on a recent speech by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who criticized efforts to nullify the Courts 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC. But at Mother Jones, Monika Bauerlein and Clara Jeffrey take the opposite view, outlining what they describe as four options to put elections back in the hands of voters.

On June 19, Justice Antonin Scalias new book with legal writing guru Bryan Garner will be released. At theNational Law Journaland theBlog of the Legal Times, Tony Mauro provides an overview of the book, which he describes as an extended plea for judges to hew to the text of statutes and the Constitution in making their decisions. And at theNew York Times, Adam Liptak reads the book for hints on the fate of the Affordable Care Act.

Briefly:

• In his column for Bloomberg View, Noah Feldman criticizes the Courts tendency to issue opinions in multiple high-profile cases during the last few days of the Term.
• In an op-ed for theWashington Times, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt argues that the Courts poor popularity ratings are undeserved.
• Jacques Billeaud of theAssociated Pressreports that if the Court in Arizona v. United States were to reject the federal governments challenge to S.B. 1070, the decision willlikely prompt lawsuits from both opponents and supporters of the law.
• UPIs Michael Kirkland covers Reichle v. Howards, in which the Court recently held that two Secret Serviceagents cannot be sued for arrestingan individual who approached then-Vice President Dick Cheney and complained about the war in Iraq.
• In his column for theWashington Post, George Will urges conservatives to wean themselves . . . from excessive respect for judicial restraint and condemnation of activism.