On June 30, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Harris v. Quinn. The central question in this case concerned whether a state can, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, compel in-home care providers paid for through Medicare, also known as “personal assistants” or “PAs,” to financially support a union to be their exclusive representative with respect to employment-related collective bargaining.
In an opinion delivered by Justice Alito, the Court held by a vote of 5-4 that the First Amendment prohibits the collection of an agency fee from PAs who do not want to join or support the union. Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas joined the opinion of the Court. Justice Kagan wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor. The decision of the Seventh Circuit was reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.
To discuss the case, we have Andrew Grossman who is an Associate at Baker & Hostetler LLP and Adjunct Scholar at the Cato Institute.
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?
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
The Supreme Court issued a number of notable opinions in the area of criminal law during the recently concluded term. Members of the Federalist Society’s Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Executive Committee offered their analysis on recent developments in the Supreme Court’s criminal law jurisprudence and fielded questions from a call-in audience.
Dean Mazzone, Chief of the Enterprise and Major Crimes Division, Massachusetts Attorney General's Office
Kent S. Scheidegger, Legal Director and General Counsel, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
Members of the Federalist Society’s Financial Services & E-Commerce Practice Group Executive Committee provided an update on recent important activity at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on this Teleforum conference call. Recent developments included CFPB Director Richard Cordray’s congressional testimony on auto lending discrimination, as well as the congressional testimony of CFPB whistleblower Ali Naraghi on alleged “results-oriented” examinations of regulated entities, bureaucratic inefficiency, and workplace discrimination at the CFPB, and Operation Chokepoint.
Hon. Wayne A. Abernathy, Executive VP for Financial Institutions Policy and Regulatory Affairs, American Bankers Association
Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, Foundation Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law