IU law prof Michael Pitts says Shelby County v. Holder is the most important election law case to reach the Supreme Court since Bush v. Gore, which decided the 2000 presidential election.
Scholars at the University of Washington and elsewhere submit a "friend of the court" brief saying the Supreme Court should keep provisions in the Voting Rights Act that require certain jurisdictions, mostly southern states, to get federal approval before changing voting laws.
Robert Bork was a major figure in the history of American law, and of the Supreme Court, says Neil Richards, JD, professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis and former law clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist. “There is a great irony to Bork’s death this week, a day after the House of Representatives voted to relax the privacy protections in the so-called “Bork Bill,” the federal law that protects the privacy of our video records.”
UIowa law professor and criminal law expert Jim Tomkovicz analyzes the legacy of the Supreme Court's Gideon v. Wainwright decision, argued 50 years ago next month, that guarantees legal representation for indigents.
There are dozens of books about Thurgood Marshall, but Prof. Larry Gibson of the University of Maryland Carey School of Law wants people to know more about the influences that helped shape the country’s first African-American Supreme Court justice.
University of Arkansas research shows Supreme Court justices use oral argument to convince their fellow justices of their own views of the case under consideration.
Michael Dorf, a constitutional law expert, former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy and professor of law at Cornell University, comments on Wednesday’s scheduled oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme in Court Fisher v. University of Texas. The case will determine the constitutionality of colleges and universities using race as a consideration for determining the structure of incoming undergraduate classes.
The U.S. Supreme Court will revisit the heated topic of affirmative action in higher education when it hears oral arguments Wednesday in Fisher v. the University of Texas. Indiana University experts are available to comment.
AERA filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. The association is joined by seven other scientific societies in urging the Court to consider an overwhelming body of scientific evidence relevant to the case.
A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on compulsory union dues has implications far beyond the language of the holding, according to an Indiana University Maurer School of Law expert.
Two Rutgers health policy experts explain the significance of the Supreme Court's decision upholding the core of President Obama's health care overhaul and what it could mean for individuals as well as the continuing debate over health care.
Dr. Jo Ivey Boufford, President of The New York Academy of Medicine, one of the nation’s oldest and preeminent medical academies, is available to comment on the landmark ruling regarding the constitutional legality of the Affordable Care Act. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hand down its ruling on Thursday, June 28, 2012.
Indiana U. faculty with expertise in constitutional law, health care economics, and health policy and administration are available to discuss the U.S. Supreme Court PPACA ruling.
The Supreme Court decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act will be a political football; its long-term existence depends on 2012 election.
“Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion on the Affordable Care Act mostly conforms with the way I previously understood the taxing power of the federal government,” says Adam Rosenzweig, JD, tax law expert and associate professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis. Rosenzweig says that there were two important pieces of the Roberts opinion from a tax standpoint.
An official statement from the University of Michigan Health System on the June 28 Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act.
Most significant perhaps in the SCOTUS opinion is that the federal expansion of Medicaid is now left at the discretion of the States meaning that perhaps some States will not move forward in expanding Medicaid to 133% of FPL although most will probably take advantage of the additional federal funding. This expansion of Medicaid highlights perhaps the biggest impact of ACA for pharmaceutical and device manufacturers.
The American Medical Group Association (AMGA) today delivered its initial comments regarding the much anticipated decision from the Supreme Court of the United States on the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (ACA).
The Supreme Court’s decision today means the implementation of the Affordable Care Act can go forward, thus improving the delivery and affordability of medical care, says Timothy McBride, PhD, health economist and associate dean for public health at the Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis.
“I expected the Court to uphold the Affordable Care Act (ACA), however, two elements of this decision are very surprising: the fact that the mandate survives under the taxing power while failing under the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause, and the fact that Chief Justice Roberts was in the majority without Justice Kennedy,” says Gregory Magarian, JD, constitutional law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis. “Roberts’ vote looks to me, as a first impression, like a brilliant piece of judicial strategizing.” Magarian is a former U.S. Supreme Court clerk for Justice John Paul Stevens.
Statement by Mark Covall, President and CEO.
The Supreme Court upheld the Obama Health Care Law. George Washington University has legal, health policy and political experts available to comment. The GW experts can comment on the legal aspects, as well as deeper political and health policy implications of the case and the decision. The following are GW experts on the health care law, the Supreme Court, health care and public/health policy, and the potential impact on the 2012 presidential campaigns.
Richard Manski is a nationally recognized expertise in data analyses, oral health services research, and oral health policy. He is serving as a senior scholar at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on June 28 that upholds the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (formerly the American Dietetic Association) said it will continue working to ensure the public has access to high-quality and potentially lifesaving food and nutrition services. The Affordable Care Act includes multiple provisions that increase the public’s access to health care and intend to transform the system towards delivery of coordinated care.
RSS
Medicine keyboard_arrow_right
Sciencekeyboard_arrow_right
Life keyboard_arrow_right
Business keyboard_arrow_right
Journal News keyboard_arrow_right
By Location keyboard_arrow_right
Meetings, Grants, and Events keyboard_arrow_right