Supreme Court resuscitates challenge to health care law
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has revived a Christian college's challenge to President Obama's health care overhaul, with the acquiescence of the Obama administration.
The court on Monday ordered the federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., to consider the claim by Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., that Obama's health care law violates the school's religious freedoms.
The court's action at this point means only that the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals must pass judgment on issues it had declined to rule on.
A federal district judge rejected Liberty's claims, and a three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit voted 2-1 that the lawsuit was premature and never dealt with the substance of the school's arguments. The Supreme Court upheld the health care law in June.
The justices used lawsuits filed by 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business to uphold the health care law by a 5-4 vote, then rejected all other pending appeals, including Liberty's.
The school made a new filing with the court over the summer to argue that its claims should be fully evaluated in light of the high court decision. The administration said it did not oppose Liberty's request.
Liberty is challenging both the requirement that most individuals obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, and a separate provision requiring many employers to offer health insurance to their workers.
The court also refused to consider whether a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to plead not guilty by reason of insanity.
The justices rejected an appeal from convicted killer John Joseph Delling of Idaho.
Delling pleaded guilty in the slayings of two college students during a trip across the West in 2007. Delling suffers from acute paranoid schizophrenia.
He was sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- NRA’s ad campaign targets Bloomberg’s push to unify advocates of gun control
- Scathing report says college trustees fail in mission
- ISIS beheads American
- Monsoon rains wreak havoc in Arizona
- Ex-Va. first lady sought credit for loan, sister-in-law says
- Weight loss differs between the sexes
- Ferguson pledges outreach
- Grand jury to hear evidence in Missouri shooting
- Agency makes high-tech push to improve military vehicles
- Landowners blamed for Del. bridge damage; fines could total millions
- Simple changes — nicotine drug, phone calls for reassurance — found to help more smokers stop