The Roundtable
Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.
 By Connor Gallagher
Connor Gallagher is a sophomore at the University of Pennsylvania studying chemical and biomolecular engineering. Texas is suing the federal government claiming that Obamacare is unconstitutional. Again. It’s becoming something of a tradition. There have been two major lawsuits concerning Obamacare (somewhat more officially known as the ACA, for Affordable Care Act) that have reached the Supreme Court. The first, National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius, was decided in 2012, two years after the law’s passage. Despite the name, petitioners numbered in the dozens. In particular, merits briefs were submitted by the attorneys general of Texas, South Carolina, Alabama, Michigan, Washington, Nebraska, Utah, Louisiana, Colorado, Idaho, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Indiana, Georgia, Ohio, Arizona, North Dakota, Alaska, Kansas, Maine, and Wisconsin, every single one of whom was a Republican at the time. [1]
1 Comment
 By Connor Gallagher
Connor Gallagher is a sophomore at the University of Pennsylvania studying chemical engineering On June 16, 2016, the Philadelphia City Council voted 13-4 in favor of a 1.5-cents-per-ounce tax on “sugar-sweetened beverages,” colloquially referred to as the “soda tax.” [1] It took effect on the first day of 2017, after surviving a legal challenge in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, the state trial court for the city. [2] Taxes on sugary drinks are recent phenomena. The first such measure in the United States was passed in late 2014 by Berkeley, California. [3] Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s ban on large soft drinks received considerably more media attention, before being struck down by a local judge in early 2013. [4] As of January 30, Philadelphia’s soda tax finds itself in similar jeopardy.  By Connor Gallagher
Connor Gallagher is a sophomore at the University of Pennsylvania studying Engineering. In April 2015, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania denied a petition for review filed by the William Penn School District, five other Pennsylvania school districts, seven parents of Pennsylvania students, the Association of Rural and Small Schools, and the NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference. [1] William Penn School District and its fellow petitioners claimed that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as represented by the Pennsylvania Department of Education, the General Assembly, and the Governor, violated the Education and Equal Protection Clauses of the Pennsylvania Constitution by perpetuating the current public school funding scheme in the state. [2] In short, the petitioners contended that they had not been provided sufficient public resources to live up to state-enacted standards in violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution. |
