Monday round-up
on Mar 2, 2015 at 5:34 am
Oral arguments in King v. Burwell, the challenge to the availability of tax subsidies for individuals who purchase their health insurance on a marketplace created by the federal government, are now just two days away, and both coverage and commentary are pouring in. Lyle Denniston previewed the oral argument for this blog, with other coverage coming from David Gutman of the (West Virginia) Sunday Gazette-Mail, Commentary comes from Robert Barnes of The Washington Post, who focuses on the role of the Chief Justice, the editorial board of The New York Times, Todd Gaziano for The Blaze, Brianne Gorod in the Los Angeles Times, Ruth Marcus for The Washington Post, Jeremy Leaming at ACSblog, and Kenneth Jost at Jost on Justice.
This morning at ten o’clock the Court will hear oral arguments in Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, in which it will consider whether the Constitution prohibits the state’s voters from handing over authority for redistricting to independent commissions. Lyle Denniston previewed the case for this blog; other coverage comes from David Savage in the Los Angeles Times. The second case today is the Confrontation Clause case Ohio v. Clark; Lyle Denniston previewed it for us.
Tomorrow the Court will hear oral arguments in City of Los Angeles v. Patel, in which it will consider a challenge to the constitutionality of a Los Angeles ordinance that allows police to review a hotel’s guest register without needing either consent or a warrant. Leslie Shoebotham previews the case at Hamilton and Griffin on Rights.
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the respondents in Patel. However, I am not affiliated with the firm.]
