Monday round-up

With the Court expected to announce the health care decision sometime this week possibly as soon as today the challenge to the Affordable Care Act continues to dominate the weekends coverage.

General coverage of the case comes from NPR, theWashington Post, theNew York Times, the Wall Street Journal,USA Today, theLos Angeles Times, andMcClatchy Newspapers. Predictions about the Courts ruling come from Douglas Kmiec atAmericamagazine and Walter Dellinger atSlate. TheWall Street Journal reports on the atmosphere in the nations capital, while theAssociated Presspreviews possible reactions to the ruling from the Romney and Obama campaigns. TheWashington Postand theNew York Timesboth report on the federal governments legal strategy in the case (as well as criticism of that strategy), while theAssociated Pressand Jack Goldsmith (writing for theNew Republic)discuss the secrecy that the Court has maintained throughout the proceedings. Stories that focus on Solicitor General Donald Verrilli appear in theWashington PostandtheABA Journal;theNew York Timesdiscusses President Obamas wait for a decision. Finally, Reuters reports on a new poll indicating that mostAmericans oppose the Affordable Care Act even though they strongly support most of its provisions.

At theAtlantic, James Fallows argues that norms are what give the Court its legitimacy, but the Roberts majority is barreling ahead without regard for the norms, and it is taking the courts legitimacy with it.In his column for theWashington Post, E.J. Dionne encourages supporters of the ACA, if the law is struck down, to find their voices and point to the 30 million people the law would help to buy health insurance.

Finally, coverage of last Thursdays decisions also continues. Bob Egelko of theSan Francisco Chroniclereports onKnox v. SEIU, in which the Court held thatemployees who decline to join their public-sector union have a First Amendment right not to be compelled, without notice and the opportunity to object, to pay special assessments for political activities; Ross Runkel analyzed the opinion for this blog. Writing for theFirst Amendment Center, Tony Mauro calls the case a significant shift and notes that some analysts consider it a death knell for public employee unions.

TheLos Angeles Timesand theWall Street Journalcover the opinion inDorsey v. United States,in which the Court held that the Fair Sentencing Act which reduced the disparities in the length of sentences for crack and powder cocaine offenses applies to defendants whose crack cocaine offenses occurred before the Act went into effect but were sentenced after the Acts effective date.

Briefly:

• Susan F. Mandiberg analyzed Thursdays opinion in Southern Union Co. v. United States for this blog.
• Pamela Constable of theWashington Postreports thatalthough Hispanic and pro-immigrant groups are preparing for an adverse ruling in Arizona v. United States, they plan to use the expected blow to rally immigrant communities to defend their rights, seek legal assistance and sign up to vote.
• In an op-ed for theWashington Post, Jonathan Turley argues that because the current Court is so small that the views of individual justices have a distorting and idiosyncratic effect on our laws, the Court should be expanded to nineteen members.
• Joan Biskupic of Reutersprovides a behind-the-sceneslook at the Court in June.
• Mike Sacks of theHuffington Postreports thatthe U.S. Chamber of Commerce is undefeated at the Supreme Court this Term.
• Looking ahead to next Term,UPIpreviewsFlorida v. Jardines, in which the Court will consider whether a dog sniff at the front door of a suspected grow house by a trained narcotics detection dog is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause.