
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
The justices wrapped up their remote November sitting with one of the most anticipated cases before the justices this term—the challenge to the Affordable Care Act.
Akin Gump’s Pratik A. Shah joined “Cases and Controversies” podcast hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to game out the likely outcomes that include the justices leaving most of the law intact.
The case, California v. Texas, derives from a 2017 amendment to the landmark law known as Obamacare that zeroed out the penalty for failing to purchase health insurance, known as the individual mandate.
GOP-led states and the federal government say the mandate was so integral to Obamacare that the rest of the law can’t stand without it. Shah, who filed an amicus brief in the case, explains why that’s unlikely to happen and why eyes should be on Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh.
3.9
149149 ratings
The justices wrapped up their remote November sitting with one of the most anticipated cases before the justices this term—the challenge to the Affordable Care Act.
Akin Gump’s Pratik A. Shah joined “Cases and Controversies” podcast hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to game out the likely outcomes that include the justices leaving most of the law intact.
The case, California v. Texas, derives from a 2017 amendment to the landmark law known as Obamacare that zeroed out the penalty for failing to purchase health insurance, known as the individual mandate.
GOP-led states and the federal government say the mandate was so integral to Obamacare that the rest of the law can’t stand without it. Shah, who filed an amicus brief in the case, explains why that’s unlikely to happen and why eyes should be on Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh.
1,090 Listeners
363 Listeners
6,279 Listeners
3,460 Listeners
454 Listeners
498 Listeners
673 Listeners
32 Listeners
111,422 Listeners
56,070 Listeners
111 Listeners
172 Listeners
5,490 Listeners
3,359 Listeners
366 Listeners
666 Listeners