David Eisenberg’s commentary on the significance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s February 25, 2015 ruling in John L. Yates v. United States was included in the Law 360 article entitled Attorneys React to High Court’s Sarbanes-Oxley ‘Fish’ Ruling. In the article, Eisenberg opined:
It is especially interesting that the Justices, all attempting to ascertain the “plain meaning” of statutory language, and to apply established rules of statutory construction, ended up in three different camps, in a 4-1-4 decision that was not split along the Court’s customary ideological lines. (The main opinion is by Ginsburg, joined by Roberts, Breyer, and Sotomayor; Alito concurring separately.) What will this mean for the Affordable Care Act case (King v. Burwell) scheduled for argument next week, where, once again, statutory construction is at the very heart of the matter? Stay tuned.
Additional attorney comments are available online to Law360 subscribers.
For Important Legal Updates and Resources on the Coronavirus Click Here.