Senator Feinstein Steps Down From Top Post After ACB Hearings | The Real Issue With ACA At SCOTUS
November 24, 2020
COMING UP SHORT
|Maryclaire Dale with the Associated Press reports on the Trump campaign’s failed effort to find voting fraud and convince the courts to help overturn JOE BIDEN’S victory. “As they frantically searched for ways to salvage PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP’S failed reelection bid, his campaign pursued a dizzying game of legal hopscotch across six states that centered on the biggest prize of all: Pennsylvania. The strategy may have played well in front of television cameras and on talk radio to Trump’s supporters. But it has proved a disaster in court, where judges uniformly rejected their claims of vote fraud and found the campaign’s legal work amateurish.”
AWK SAUCE
|Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson with Bloomberg Law notes PRESIDENT-ELECT JOE BIDEN could soon be in a very awkward position. His top lawyer at SCOTUS may have no choice but to change the government’s position in an election dispute out of Arizona, which Robinson says is the kind of thing that irritates the justices. “The case, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, takes aim at voting restrictions passed by the state to limit out-of-precinct voting and restrict who can collect and return mail-in ballots. Republicans say the law is designed to prevent voter fraud while Democrats say it disenfranchises minority voters, who disproportionately vote outside their precincts and rely on others to handle their mail-in ballots.”
NEVER SAY DI
|After coming under fire from her fellow Democrats for her handling of AMY CONEY BARRETT’S confirmation hearings, SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN said yesterday that she’ll step down from her role as the top Dem on the Senate Judiciary Committee. In her statement, the California senator said she plans to instead focus on wildfire and drought issues and the effects of climate change in her home state. Mary Clare Jalonick and Matthew Daly with the Associated Press report.
TOP-ED
|In The Hill, Lawrence Friedman reflects on the latest ACA case that came before justices this month. The issue concerning the court this time around is whether Congress effectively killed the law entirely when it removed the penalty associated with the individual mandate to obtain health insurance. Even though most justices seemed skeptical of that suggestion, Friedman writes, “The real issue is how we came to a place where a profound piece of social legislation continues to be subject to second guesses from the judiciary. It is simple to assign blame to conservative politicians and attorneys general opposed to any broader federal programs. But at least some of this blame should be reserved for CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS.”