Monday round-up
on Jun 16, 2014 at 7:57 am
In this third week of June, the Court is scheduled to issue opinions in argued cases both this morning and Thursday at 10 a.m. We also expect orders from the June 12 Conference this morning at 9:30 a.m. We will begin live-blogging at 9:15 a.m.
Last Thursday’s ruling in POM Wonderful v. Coca-Cola Co., holding that POM can bring a Lanham Act claim challenging food and beverage labels regulated under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, continues to generate coverage, including from John Duffy for this blog, David Savage of the Los Angeles Times, and Michael Bobelian of Forbes. Commentary comes from Glen Lammi at the Washington Legal Foundation’s Legal Pulse blog, who predicts that, in the wake of the decision, “one should expect the status quo or perhaps an uptick in state consumer protection class actions nit-picking at marketing claim on processed food labels.”
Other coverage of the Court looks ahead to the decisions that the Court has not yet released. In the Los Angeles Times, David Savage summarizes some of the highest-profile cases that remain undecided. At Balkinization, Marty Lederman anticipates the Court’s eventual decision in the challenges to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate: in one post, he considers how a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit holding that “secondary ‘accommodation’ for preventive services coverage does not substantially burden the religious exercise of nonprofit religious organizations that would invoke that accommodation” might mean for the Court’s decision, while in the other he returns to the oral argument in the case and, in particular, the question whether there is in fact an employer mandate.
Briefly:
- At (Raleigh, N.C.) newsobserver.com, Craig Jarvis reports on efforts by North Carolina legislators to repeal the state’s statute of repose; the proposed legislation is intended to respond to the Court’s decision earlier this month in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, which could shut down a lawsuit by North Carolina landowners seeking damages for groundwater contamination. .
- In The National Law Journal (registration required), Tony Mauro examines the writing style of Justice Elena Kagan, as on display in last week’s decision in the immigration case Scialabba v. Cuellar de Osorio.
