[VIDEO] Pokémon Go versus the FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules…in 60 Seconds 

With its “T-Mobile Tuesdays” promotion, T-Mobile is giving customers free data for Pokémon Go. But does that defy net neutrality? AEI Visiting Fellow Roslyn Layton describes how the FCC’s rules impact zero-rating—the practice of giving away free data for certain applications.

netneutrality


In Honor of Constitution Day….

WASHINGTON - DECEMBER 15: Ethan Kasnett, an 8th grade student at the Lab School in Washington, DC, views the original constitution. (Brendan Smialowski/GETTY IMAGES)

The Cato Supreme Court Review, edited by Ilya Shapiro, is published annually on Constitution Day.

Now in its fourteenth edition, the Review is the first scholarly journal to appear after each SCOTUS term ends and the only one grounded in the nation’s first principles, liberty, and limited governmentCATO-SCOTUS

The Review has built quite a reputation over the years, and has earned some high praise from notable SCOTUS experts:

“Cato, with its emphasis on limited government and individual rights, has weighed in with a book of essays by academics and practicing lawyers that manages to skewer liberal and conservative justices alike.”
Tony Mauro, Supreme Court correspondent, The National Law Journal and Legal Times

“Unquestionably, the definitive volume on the Supreme Court’s term.”
Tom Goldstein, founder of SCOTUSblog (and co-chair of litigation and Supreme Court practice at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld LLP)

In this year’s issueShapiro and other leading legal scholars analyze the 2014-2015 Supreme Court term, specifically focusing on the most important and far-reaching cases of the year, as well as upcoming cases to watch.

Read this issue online, or explore the archive…..


Supreme Court to Hear Obamacare Case Over Subsidies; Could Redefine the Law

supreme-court

The Supreme Court will wade into the fight over Obamacare once again, this time deciding whether subsidies tied to the overhaul should be restricted to certain states under a strict reading of the law.

Justices announced Friday they would take up King v. Burwell, a case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

“The Supreme Court has the opportunity to reaffirm the principle that the law is what Congress enacts, not what the administration or others wish Congress had enacted with the benefit of hindsight.”

— Jonathan Adler, one of the key architects of the legal challenge

The King lawsuit is one of several that says the Obama administration stretched the meaning of the Affordable Care Act by allowing every health exchange in the nation to dole out premium tax credits to qualified Americans.

“The law’s opponents say Obamacare’s architects used the subsidies to entice states to set up their own exchanges instead of asking the federal government to do it for them. To cover their tracks, they say, the IRS issued a rule to make it clear that all states could enjoy the subsidies.”

At issue is a phrase in the law that says the subsidies are reserved for people who used an exchange “established by the state,” which challengers took to mean the 15 exchange set up by 14 states and the District of Columbia. Read the rest of this entry »


[VIDEO] Oh Yes He Did: Obamacare’s Architect Agreed That Only State Exchanges Could Offer Subsidies

gruber-halbig“What’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credit.”

Jonathan Gruber, on the record explaining that Obamacare subsidies are limited to state exchanges

NRO‘s Veronique de Rugy has the best summary of this breaking story, from last night. Follow the links to see more from the sources, and here to see the full text of this one at The Corner. Reason’s Peter Suderman published an interesting revelation about the history of the decision reached this week by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, that Obamacare subsidies couldn’t be distributed unless it happened through a state exchange.

Is there video? Oh yeah, there’s video:

[See Peter Suderman’s revelation at Reason]clip_image002_0073

[See Dueling Rulings Hasten Obamacare’s Almost Certain Path Back to the Supreme Court]

[Also see Ed Morrissey’s comments at Hot Air]

It turns out that one of the key minds behind Obamacare, MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, entirely agreed with Michael Cannon and Jonathan Adler, the scholars behind the legal theory that backed up the Halbig plaintiffs who triumphed this week.  He’s on the record explaining that Obamacare subsidies are limited to state exchanges.

UPDATE: Wait, there’s more video? Yes, there’s more video. The White House takes a flailing spin:

Back to Veronique de Rugy‘s Corner item, quoting from Reason‘s Suderman bombshell Suderman writes:

Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who helped design the Massachusetts health law that was the model for Obamacare, was a key influence on the creation of the law. He was widely quoted in the media. During the crafting of the law, the Obama administration brought him on for his expertise. He was paid almost $400,000 to consult with the administration on the law. And he has claimed to have written part of the legislation, the section dealing with small business tax credits. Read the rest of this entry »


BREAKING: Federal Appeals Court Panel Says Most Obamacare Subsidies Illegal

Plane-Crash

Crash and burn for Obamacare?

 reports: In a potentially crippling blow to Obamacare, a top federal appeals court Tuesday said that billions of dollars worth of government subsidies that helped 4.7 million people buy insurance on obama-exec-oHealthCare.gov are not legal under the Affordable Care Act.

“Now, Obama and Company will look for John Roberts to pull their fat out of the fire again. I am afraid he will.”

— Wesley J. Smith

[Obamacare Fed Exchange Subsidies Fall]

In its decision, a three-judge panel said that such subsidies can be granted only to people who bought insurance in an Obamacare exchange run by an individual state or the District of Columbia — not on the federally run exchange HealthCare.gov. Plaintiffs in the case known as Halbig v. Burwell argued that the ACA, as written, only allows that often-significant financial aid to be issued to people who bought insurance on a marketplace set up a state.

[Also see: Good News: Americans No Longer Required to Obey Laws, Regulations, or Court Decisions]

[White House on Obamacare Ruling: Letter of the Law Doesn’t Matter]

[See the court document here]

The decision is certain to be challenged by the Obama Administration, and does not immediately have the effect of law. But if it is ultimately upheld, it would cause insurance rates for those people who lost the subsidies to dramatically rise. Read the rest of this entry »


As panic spreads, Reid threatens permanent changes for short-term political survival

Burdened with a failing president and stung by blocked appointments, Reid rallies Senate to impose limits on filibuster in desperate effort to advance judicial agenda

JUDGES-popup WASHINGTON —  writes: Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, is prepared to move forward with a vote that could severely limit the minority party’s ability to filibuster presidential nominees, possibly as early as this week, Democrats said Tuesday.

Exasperated with the refusal of Senate Republicans to confirm many of President Obama’s nominees, Mr. Reid has been speaking individually with members of his caucus to gauge whether there is enough support to change filibuster rules.

Given how much deference senators have traditionally shown to the rules and procedures of the institution — many of them in place since the 18th century — any modifications are a serious undertaking. Read the rest of this entry »