,
 //  6/1/17  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus TrumpTake Care's podcast, Easha and Jason dig into healthcare for the first time, as they take a deep dive into the House v. Price litigation that addresses whether certain payments to insurers under the Affordable Care Act have been properly appropriated. As usual, you can listen online below or at takecareblog.com/podcast, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

Easha and Jason open [start-10:55] with a summary of the history of payments to insurance companies and the claims by the Republican House of Representatives that so-called "cost-sharing reduction" payments were not properly appropriated in the Affordable Care Act. They next explain how the Trump Administration has failed to commit to making these payments to insurers for the remainder of the year, which has introduced substantial uncertainty into the healthcare market. The two then turn [from 10:55-29:48] to an analysis of the merits of the challenge, and they also discuss whether the House of Representatives had a right to bring the lawsuit in the first place. 

Jason and Easha then drop a few Trump Lumps, and do quick hits regarding immigration rhetoric vs. action and drug testing for unemployment benefits. [29:50-end.] 

Listen online below or at takecareblog.com/podcast, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

Please share or provide feedback, and rate us in iTunes. You can find us at @VersusTrumpPod on twitter, or send us an email at versustrumppodcast@gmail.com.

Links

Healthcare

  • The district court's decision on the merits in House v. Price is here. The court's earlier decision regarding standing is here.
  • The States' Motion to Intervene on appeal is here.
  • A news report about the most recent request for a delay in the appeal is here.
  • President Trump's interview in the Wall Street Journal, where he suggests that his administration may no longer make cost-sharing payments, is here.
  • Easha mentioned Vox's coverage of the Blue Cross Blue Shield premium hike in North Carolina, and the article is here.
  • Nick Bagley's law review article discussing many challenges to the Affordable Care Act, including House v. Price, is here.
  • All of Take Care's coverage about healthcare is here.

Trump Lumps

  • Easha's Trump Lump about her schadenfreude at the Republicans' failure at administrative law was inspired by a report in Bloomberg here.

Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue – Requiem for the Establishment Clause?

7/1/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Those who still believe that the Constitution precludes state involvement in promoting religious thought and experience now have some work cut out for them

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

Religious Discrimination And Racial Discrimination

6/30/20  //  Quick Reactions

The Court’s decision in Espinoza is similar to the trajectory of the law of racial discrimination in some respects, it also offers a striking contrast in others

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

The DACA Decision is Trouble for Discrimination Law

6/24/20  //  Commentary

The Dreamers’ victory has been celebrated as a sign that the Court is above partisanship and willing to serve as a check on executive branch abuses. But the price of that victory was a defeat for the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.

Jessica Clarke

Vanderbilt Law School