Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group Podcast
In a case decided on Tuesday, July 22, 2014 by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the court ruled that subsidies can be granted only to those people who bought health insurance in exchanges run by an individual state or the District of Columbia, and not to people who purchased health insurance on the federally run exchange, HealthCare.gov. How did the court reach its conclusion, and is the court’s reasoning sound? Will the ruling make the Affordable Care Act financially unworkable? Is a final ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court inevitable?
Administrative Law & Regulation and Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Groups Podcast
- Prof. Jonathan Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
- Prof. Nicholas Bagley, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
At bottom, in Kuretski v. Commissioner, presidential power is at stake. Judges of the U.S. Tax Court (26 USC 7443(f)), were arguably characterized by the U.S. Supreme Court, in Freytag v. Commissioner, as exercising a portion of the judicial power of the United States. Recently, however, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed when it found that the Tax Court exercises only executive power. What are the implications of the D.C. Circuit Court’s opinion on the president’s removal power? Has the D.C. Circuit misread Freytag, or faithfully applied it?
SCOTUScast 7-17-14 featuring Kristin Gutting
- Prof. Kristin E. Hickman, Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School
- Prof. Tuan Samahon, Professor of Law, Villanova University School of Law
On June 19, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in United States v. Clarke. The question in this case is whether an unsupported allegation that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued a summons for an improper purpose entitles an opponent of the summons to an evidentiary hearing to question IRS officials about their reasons for issuing the summons.
Justice Kagan delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court, which held that an allegation of improper purpose does not entitle a taxpayer to examine IRS officials. Rather, the taxpayer may do so when he can point to “specific facts or circumstances plausibly raising an inference of bad faith." The contrary decision of the Eleventh Circuit was vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings.
To discuss the case, we have Kristin Gutting, an associate professor of law at the Charleston School of Law. Second Annual Executive Branch Review Conference
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is in the headlines almost daily. This panel will discuss the IRS’s proposed revision to 501(c)(4) rules, the targeting of certain organizations in IRS review and approval processes, as well as the IRS’s determination, currently the subject of litigation, that individuals who participate in federally-run as well as state-run health care exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act are entitled to subsidies.
A key element of the Practice Groups' Executive Branch Review project is our annual conference. This year's Executive Branch Review Conference took place on May 7th at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.
The Internal Revenue Service
11:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.
- Mr. Michael A. Carvin,Partner, Jones Day
- Dr. Craig Holman,Government Affairs Lobbyist, Public Citizen
- Ms. Cleta Mitchell, Partner, Foley & Lardner LLP
- Mr. Robert N. Weiner, Partner, Arnold & Porter LLP
- Moderator: Mr. Dean A. Reuter, Vice President & Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society