The court generally applies strict scrutiny if a law is rooted in prejudice against a disfavored minority group. Vaello-Madero says that is true here. The history dates to , when the U. A pivotal issue in the case will be whether the justices agree with Vaello-Madero about invidious discrimination or whether they view the SSI exclusion merely as an example of differential treatment based on geography, which the court has suggested is more benign.
After all, people of Puerto Rican heritage are not categorically barred from the SSI program — they are eligible along with any other American if they live in a state. Vaello-Madero responds that a purportedly geographic classification violates equal protection if it is a proxy for racial prejudice or targeted mistreatment of a politically powerless group. In Califano v. Torres and Harris v.
Califano specifically involved SSI benefits — though the challenge was based on the right to travel, not equal protection.
The government says there is no reason to second-guess the rulings in Califano and Harris , both of which applied rational-basis review.
Vaello-Madero argues that neither case controls the outcome here, and in any event, that both decisions should be overruled because they relied on the disgraced Insular Cases.
The government argues that applying strict scrutiny in this case would disrupt numerous longstanding policies — including the handful of policies such as exemptions from most federal income taxes that benefit, rather than harm, Puerto Rico residents. Posted in Merits Cases.
Cases: United States v. A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect. Full analysis from AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:.
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog. SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents. The vaccine-policy cases are possible, but we don't know in advance which cases we'll get. We'll be live-blogging starting at On Thursday, Jan. Arturo de la Barrera via Flickr.
While DACA is often described as a program for young immigrants, many recipients have lived in the U. Many have become doctors, nurses, and other front-line workers during the pandemic. Some recipients are grandparents. Opponents of the program argue that Obama illegally circumvented Congress months before his re-election and that he failed to follow federal procedure in establishing the program.
District Judge Andrew Hanen will hear the case. Hanen in invalidated an Obama effort to expand DACA and extend protections to immigrant parents. Hanen is not expected to rule immediately. Source link. Recipients must pass a background check. While the U. Supreme Court on Jan. Circuit Court for the Sixth District reinstated the rule on Dec. Any remaining unvaccinated staff must produce negative test results on a weekly basis.
OSHA has said it will defer issuing citations prior to Jan. During the Jan. Failing to act on the ETS now could lead to citations and fines. The plus webinar attendees posed a number of questions about the ETS, such as precisely when a business is considered to have employees.
0コメント