Friday round-up

Coverage of the Court continues to focus on the upcoming Term. Slates Dahlia Lithwick previews the Terms major cases, suggesting that, although [t]his term may not hold out the promise of blockbusters like last years same-sex marriage cases or the Voting Rights Act challenge (or the still-traumatizing Obamacare challenge from the year before), . . . it may nevertheless end up standing for the final demise of the OConnor legacy. Lawrence Hurley of Reuters highlights this Terms employment cases, noting that last Term the justices . . . delivered a string of victories to businesses and employers.

At The Economists Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie discusses an issue that is likely to be before the Court this Term: the challenge to the Affordable Care Acts requirement that employers provide their employees with insurance that includes access to birth control. He concludes that [h]ow the Supreme Court will sort this out is difficult to parse. The five conservative justices appear sceptical of Obamacare’s underpinnings, while the four liberals on the court are unlikely to ratchet up constitutional rights for corporations.

Finally, at the Ogletree Deakins blog, Vicki Nielsen and Hera Arsen summarize United States v. Quality Stores, in which the Court granted review on Tuesday to consider whether severance payments to employees are subject to payroll taxes.