Holding Congress to its Word: Statutory Realism, Second-Generation Textualism, and ACA Entrenchment in Maine Community Health Options Abbe R. Gluck Professor of Law and Faculty Director, Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy, Yale Law School
Abbe R. Gluck[ ]
“The stakes of the risk corridor cases underscore the ACA’s outsized impact. The Supreme Court decides many of the most contentious and significant issues facing the nation, but even the Supreme Court does not get many $12 billion cases.”
- Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, who opposed the ACA in the Supreme Court twice before defending it in 2020[2]
No statute in modern American history has been challenged as much as the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Few, if any, other statutes are as long or as complex in design. No statute has been as politically wounded: Congress tried unsuccessfully to repeal the ACA more than seventy times and then worked instead, sometimes with the Wh
Monday, November 2, 2020
Representatives from both the hydropower industry and environmental conservation associations recently issued a Joint Statement of Collaboration on U.S. Hydropower (“Joint Statement”). The Joint Statement was the product of dialog that began in 2018, convened by Stanford University’s Woods Institute for the Environment, Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance, and the Energy Futures Initiative. The Joint Statement suggests that, after the decades of strife between the two sides over the environmental impacts of hydropower development, hydropower’s ability to produce carbon-free energy provides the basis for détente that should ease the regulatory path for hydropower development, especially on existing dams that are not fitted with hydroelectric generators.