Search for: "King v. Burwell" Results 81 - 100 of 830
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jul 2016, 2:30 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Employers, insurers and other health plan sponsors or issuers (health plans), health care providers, healthcare clearinghouses (covered entities) and their business associates should reevaluate the adequacy of their practices and procedures for the protection of electronic protected health information (ePHI) on or accessible through laptops or other mobile devices in light of the $2.75 million penalty and other schooling the Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (OCR) just… [read post]
27 Jun 2016, 8:01 pm
And, in the most ridiculous Supreme Court case in a long time (well since last term's King v. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 5:57 am by Jonathan H. Adler
But if the court were interested, this would be an interesting case to expound upon the “major questions” exception to Chevron that the Court identified in last year’s King v. [read post]
8 Jun 2016, 7:37 pm
The case of King v Burwell  had  reached the US Supreme Court because of the phrase "exchanges established by the state. [read post]
13 May 2016, 11:37 am by NCC Staff
Two months later, the Supreme Court stepped in to hear the case, King v. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 8:57 am by Peter Margulies
” As the Court has said repeatedly, most recently in 2015’s King v. [read post]
14 Apr 2016, 8:41 am by Marty Lederman
 (Three other individual petitioners--Alveda King, Janet Morana and Father Frank Pavone--are directors of Priests for Life.)The government's argument as to insured plans.The government explains in its supplemental brief that the Court's proposal for employers with insured plans basically describes the government's existing accommodation itself, with one exception. [read post]