Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
The legal battle over the president's health care law may not be settled after all today -- US Supreme Court started a new term.
And there in the list of cases the justices play -- to hear.
A signal that they've opened the door to two new challenges to president Obama's signature legislation.
The court upheld most of that law in a ruling over the summer including the requirement that folks buy health insurance or face fines.
Also in this term court watchers say that they expect the justices to take on several hot button topics among them.
Same sex marriage and a challenge to a key civil rights law the voting rights act.
It requires states with a history of discrimination to get approval from the feds before making any changes to election and voting rules.
Shannon -- covers the court for -- and she's live in Washington this afternoon.
-- Shannon what's left to be settled here.
What a constant health care law you'll remember back in June the court upheld the -- individual mandate and also ruled on some other issues involving the expansion of Medicaid.
But there are many other portions of the law that the High Court did not rule on including the employer mandate.
And that's one of the elements that did liberty at universities and challenging from the beginning.
And today the court indicated it is willing to take that issue seriously by giving the administration thirty days to respond.
To a request by liberty university for a rehearing on that issue shaft.
So that's one thing but what are the odds are the analysts are giving it -- that this will ever make it before the court.
Well there are many court watchers like former senior Justice Department official Thomas Dupree who believe.
That the university actually does have a good shot at getting a second chance.
I think they've got very good arguments that they are entitled to their day in court.
Have a decision rendered on the merits of their claims now whether or not those merits ultimately prevail I think it's certainly open to the the gates would first be sent back to a lower court but if that does happen it could be on track to get back to the Supreme Court within a year session up so what would be the the case that goes before the court first in this terror.
Well the first one will come to us next week the justices will tackle the use of -- race based admissions criteria by colleges.
This case was brought by white plaintiffs who say they were denied admission to the University of Texas because of race based preferences.
That -- given to minority applicants now it's been several years since the court last week in on college admission policies.
And there are several new justices now on the -- this case which comes next Wednesday could impact every college in America.
-- and distinction and bring even -- -- good to see Shannon thank you to the ticket to the judge why don't we Fox News senior judicial and mr.
-- and while I was here.
-- -- -- I was reading through this stuff and was surprised to find that this is still an issue it sounded like this was over well you know this took a lot of -- by surprise Shep I'll tell you why there are 45.
Lawsuits still out there.
Challenging as Shannon just so nicely explain the employer mandate this is the obligation of an employer.
To make available to his employees the case a college it would be students in the case the hospital would be patients who.
An array of of procedures.
Paid for by the health care provide -- That are against the values of the employer.
In the case of let's say the University of Notre Dame or the Archdiocese of New York two of these plaintiffs it would -- abortion contraception.
So we all thought.
Those are so watch the court.
That these 45 lawsuits would take their time a trial judge would rule on them they'd make their way to an intermediate appellate court and maybe the Supreme Court would take it.
What was so surprising today is -- Supreme Court.
That schedule and basically said to the fourth Circuit Court of Appeals which already ruled on this issue.
We want you look at this again.
In light of our decision.
Last June and maybe we'll take a look at.
So the issue of whether the religious.
At that concerns.
Can block the application.
Of the statute.
Is what the court will review probably next year and -- faster because of what -- did today.
If you think that the other matter this.
Areas that had discrimination.
And a lot of it over the years they can't change things without permission.
You know the voting rights act has been upheld by the Supreme Court several times can the lower federal courts have been faithful to that.
Now there is a new challenge and they basically challenging the core of it you know about this because you were raised in the state that is subject to the voting rights act.
Certain states typically in the south.
But I've had a very bad track record when it comes to the ability of minorities to vote are subject to the oversight of the Justice Department.
They want to get out from under the oversight of the Justice Department.
So instead of forcing.
The state to get permission from the Justice Department.
If there's something in the law that interferes with the rights of minorities to vote.
These states want the minorities to have to challenge it just like anybody would challenge a law they don't want Big Brother in the Justice Department telling them what to do.
The Supreme Court surprise and he's agreed to hear that.
So if the Supreme Court changes the law that will be a radical change to remove the Justice Department.
From this equation if it upholds it would probably won't hear about this for another 25 years.
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
Filter by section