With the Court still in recess, the Affordable Care Act continues to dominate coverage and commentary.  At the Huffington Post, Mike Sacks looks at how a “fantasy Court” made up of the nine Justices who have received the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the past fifty years might rule on the constitutionality of the ACA, while at Balkinization Brian Galle argues that “upholding the [ACA] under the taxing power would allow the Court to issue a genuine holding – not just dictum – narrowing the scope of the Commerce power, while at the same time avoiding the unpredictable mess that invalidating the statute would bring.”  And at the NPR health blog Shots, Jay Hancock discusses two websites on which people can bet (for money or just “bragging rights”) about the outcome of the Court’s ruling on the ACA.

Briefly:

  • Lyle Denniston of this blog discusses the recent request by immigrants’ rights group that the Court modify its 2009 opinion in Nken v. Holder in light of the federal government’s acknowledgement that it inadvertently supplied the Court with faulty information about U.S. immigration policy.
  • At the Volokh Conspiracy, David Post discusses Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, in which the Court will consider the legality of purchasing copyrighted works overseas and bringing them back to the U.S. for resale, without the permission of the copyright owner.

Posted in Round-up

Recommended Citation: Conor McEvily, Wednesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (May. 9, 2012, 9:59 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/05/wednesday-round-up-134/