Few pieces that you should be reading about yesterday's terrible Supreme Court decisions. First, Sarah Jaffe on how the two cases are interlocking: We've long known that low-wage workers have.
While today's pair of horrible decisions might seem like distinct issues, in fact they are both part of a larger war on women and workers. The absurdity of the Hobby.
I was not looking forward to the new Supreme Court term. There are two major labor cases on the docket. Given the plutocratic nature of the 5 Republican members, I.
Rich Yeselson with a good overview of how the Supreme Court is likely to eviscerate card check for unions next year: The circuit court panel remanded back to the district.
NPR released a new poll this morning of LVs concerning attitudes towards the ACA and the USSC decision. Briefly, a) there's not much new here, and b) most of the.
Steve Benen on the scary part of today's Supreme Court ruling: And yet, as of this morning, four justices -- Alito, Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas -- insisted on doing exactly.
In attempting to rebut Koppleman's point that the argument against the ACA has striking parallels with Hammer v. Dagenhart, amidst a bunch of other howlers Althouse inadvertently reaffirms his point:.
Andrew Koppelman is correct that Hammer v. Dagenhart would be the most obvious precedent for a Supreme Court decision striking down the ACA: Both then and now, challengers to the statutes.
