Thread by @mjs_DC

The Supreme Court's first decision of the day is Marietta Memorial Hospital v. DaVita. In a 7–2 opinion by Kavanaugh, the court holds that group health plan can limit outpatient dialysis benefits for patients with late-stage renal disease. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

In dissent, Kagan, joined by Sotomayor, says the majority crafts "a massive and inexplicable workaround" that lets group health plans single out and discriminate against patients with late-stage renal disease.

Breyer joins the majority. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

An interesting and helpful passage from Kagan explaining how reducing benefits for outpatient dialysis obviously targets patients with end stage renal disease because they are essentially the only people receiving dialysis. Citing Lawrence v. Texas! supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

The Supreme Court's second decision of the day is U.S. v. Taylor. In a 7-2 opinion by Gorsuch, the court holds that attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not a “crime of violence” that triggers a sentence enhancement.

There will be more opinions. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

Gorsuch often leans left in cases involving federal sentence enhancements and this decision is no exception. The upshot of his opinion is that the defendant faces up to 20 years in prison, not 30. (I think he is right.)

Thomas, joined by Alito, dissents. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

Sorry—Thomas and Alito wrote separate dissents, though Alito says he agrees with Thomas. Both are frustrated with the "categorical approach" that the court uses to interpret many federal sentence enhancement statutes. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

The court's third decision of the day is in U.S. v. Washington. Breyer's unanimous opinion holds that Washington State may NOT apply its workers' comp law to employees of a federal nuclear facility within its borders. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

Well, Washington's law applied not to full-fledged employees, but to federal contract workers, whom the state tried to protect by creating a presumption that certain diseases and illnesses are caused by their nuclear cleanup work. SCOTUS says: That violates the Supremacy Clause.

There will be more opinion(s) today. They could come from Breyer, Thomas, or Roberts, since opinions are released in order of reverse seniority.

We know there will be more opinion(s) because the R- column on the left hasn't been filled in yet.

The Supreme Court's fourth decision is Carson v. Makin. This is a big one. In a 6–3 opinion by Roberts, the court holds that Maine violated the free exercise clause by refusing to provide public funding to private religious schools. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

Carson v. Makin is a major decision with huge consequences for state funding of religion. The conservative majority holds that the First Amendment requires Maine's taxpayers to fund explicitly religious education. That is a breathtakingly radical holding. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

Sotomayor, dissenting: "This Court continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build. ... The consequences of the Court’s rapid transformation of the Religion Clauses must not be understated." supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

Here is Breyer asking the next logical question: Does this ruling mean that states must provide equal funding to private religious schools and public schools? Taken at face value, Roberts' decision has the potential to dismantle secular public education. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

And here's Sotomayor spelling out the implications of today's ruling: A state's effort to preserve the constitutional separation of church and state now qualifies as a violation of free exercise. The majority is repealing the establishment clause. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

The Supreme Court's fifth and final decision of the day is Shoop v. Twyford. In a 5–4 opinion by Roberts, the majority bars district courts from ordering states to provide medical testing to prisoners that might help them get habeas relief. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

The three liberals dissent on procedural grounds, as does Gorsuch in a separate opinion. Once again, Gorsuch's defection from the conservative bloc does not change the outcome on a 6–3 court.

That's all for today. More opinions Thursday. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…

One interesting tidbit about Carson v. Makin: Justice Souter, sitting on the 1st Circuit, joined the opinion that SCOTUS reversed today. So we don't have to guess where he would've landed here. casetext.com/case/carson-v-…