Yesterday the Court issued two opinions in argued cases, including in the campaign finance case McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, in which it struck down the aggregate limits that federal law imposes on campaign contributions to candidates for federal office, political parties, and political action committees. Lyle Denniston covered the decision for this blog, while I did the same in Plain English and Mark Walsh provided us with a view from the courtroom during the announcement of the opinion. Andrew Hamm rounded up early coverage of the decision for the blog; other coverage of the decision comes from Jess Bravin and Colleen McCain Nelson of The Wall Street Journal, Daniel Mullen of JURIST, and Bill Mears and Tom Cohen of CNN; in a separate story, Mears also reports on the effect that the Court’s decision is likely to have on politics. Commentary on the decision comes from Jeffrey Toobin for CNN, Ilya Shapiro at Cato at Liberty, Trevor Burrus at the Daily Caller, and Jessica Ring Amunson, David Earley, and James C. Nelson at ACSblog.
- In her column for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse discusses the possible options for the Court in the challenges to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
- Elizabeth LaForgia of JURIST covers yesterday’s other decision, Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, in which the Court held that the Airline Deregulation Act preempts a frequent flier’s state law claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
- At Reason, Damon Root weighs in on Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, in which the Court will consider a challenge to a state law which criminalizes false statements about the voting record of a candidate or public official during a campaign.