- Show all
- Abigail Coursolle
- Alejandra Pavisich
- Alexis Robles-Fradet
- Alicia Emanuel
- Amy Chen
- Andy DiAntonio
- Brian Brooks
- Candace Gibson
- Carly Myers
- Cat Duffy
- Catherine McKee
- Cathren Cohen
- Charly Gilfoil
- Corey Davis
- Dania Douglas
- Daniel Young
- daryln
- David Machledt
- Elizabeth Edwards
- Elizabeth G. Taylor
- Eskedar Girmash
- Fabiola Carrión
- Georgesula Ziama
- Geron Gadd
- Hannah Eichner
- Hayley Penan
- Héctor Hernández-Delgado
- Ian McDonald
- Jane Perkins
- Jasmine Young
- Jennifer Lav
- Joe McLean
- Kasey Nichols
- Kimberly Lewis
- Leonardo Cuello
- lhigashi
- Lisa Munoz
- Liz McCaman Taylor
- Madeline Morcelle
- Mara Youdelman
- Maya Levin
- Michelle Lilienfeld
- Michelle Yiu
- Miriam Delaney Heard
- Mizue Suito
- Priscilla Huang
- Rachel Holtzman
- Sarah Grusin
- Sarah Somers
- Skyler Rosellini
- Susan Berke Fogel
- T. Nancy Lam
- veng
- Wayne Turner
- Zamir M. Brown
- Show all
- Alabama
- Alaska
- All United States
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- District of Columbia
- Florida
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Montana
- National
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
- February 15, 2023
Delegation of Rulemaking Authority in Light of the “Major Questions Doctrine”
Jane Perkins and Erica Turret* Issue Brief, Fact Sheet, Court DocumentRead moreIn West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court addressed a “particular and recurring problem: agencies asserting highly consequential power beyond what Congress could reasonably be understood to have granted.” By a 6-3 majority, the Court held that, when a “major question” is involved, the decision on how to regulate…
- November 3, 2020
The Affordable Care Act in Court : Litigation Continues Unabated
Read moreThe Affordable Care Act has been a lightning rod for litigation, generating hundreds of cases seeking to have all or parts of the law declared illegal. This article focuses on Supreme Court cases that have assessed the ACA over the past decade and highlights those on the Court's pending…
- July 16, 2020
June Medical Services v. Russo and the Work that Remains for Underserved Populations
Read moreOn June 29th, the Supreme Court ruled in June Medical Services vs. Russo that Louisiana’s admitting privileges law is unconstitutional and blocked it from taking effect. This win for reproductive health advocates means that abortion clinics can remain open to serve patients who need abortion care in Louisiana and…
- May 13, 2020
Amicus: California v. Texas, U.S. Supreme Court
Read moreThe National Health Law Program and ten other organizations filed an amicus brief opposing a group of states’ effort to invalidate the Affordable Care Act, including the Medicaid expansion and other provisions designed to improve the Medicaid program. Texas and twelve other states arguing that the ACA’s minimum coverage…
- December 18, 2018
Amicus Brief in Support of Maryland’s Anti-Price Gouging Law for Prescription Drugs
Read moreThe National Health Law Program filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court asking it to review a 4th Circuit decision that struck down Maryland's anti-price gouging law for prescription drugs as unconstitutional. The brief focuses on the impact of high drug costs on low-income people and…
- March 24, 2016
Amicus Brief: California v. Trump
Read moreThe National Health Law Program (NHeLP) filed on October 21, a "friend of the court" brief in federal court in California on behalf of Families USA, NHeLP, and 29 other health care and consumer advocacy groups, supporting a legal challenge to the Trump administration's latest effort to sabotage the…
