Court's rejection of fast-track request raises questions, issues

The court's online order did not offer any legal reasoning, nor were dissenting opinions noted. However, Justice Elena Kagan did participate in the decision. Meanwhile, Politico Pro explores some of the key questions that will be at stake surrounding the law's "individual mandate" as the challenges now wind through through the federal appeals courts this summer.

The Washington Post: Supreme Court Turns Down Va.'s Request To Expedite Review Of Health Care Law
Monday's action on the Virginia request did provide one clue about the court's future deliberations on the health care law: It appears that Justice Elena Kagan participated in the decision. Conservative critics of the law have suggested that Kagan might have to sit out review of the law because of her role as President Obama's first solicitor general (Barnes, 4/25).

The New York Times: Justices Reject Request For Fast Health Law Ruling
The Supreme Court on Monday turned back an unusual request from Virginia to put the state's challenge to the new federal health care law on a fast track. The court's one-line order offered no reasoning, and there were no noted dissenting votes (Liptak, 4/25).

The Baltimore Sun: Supreme Court Refuses To Skip Lower Courts On Health Care Reform Law
The Supreme Court refused Monday to bypass the lower courts and take up an immediate challenge to the constitutionality of the national health care reform law and its requirement that all those who can afford it have medical insurance by 2014. The announcement concerned only the timing of a decision on the health care law and said nothing about how the court may finally rule (Savage, 4/25).

The Hill: Kagan Does Not Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Discussion
Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan did not recuse herself from Monday's decision not to fast-track the high court's review of Virginia's challenge to the health care reform law, prompting speculation that President Obama's former solicitor general intends to take part in the case if and when it reaches her level. "If Kagan didn't recuse herself from this decision, it would hint that she won't recuse herself from any ObamaCare deliberations despite ... the possibility that she gave the administration legal advice on crafting and defending the law," the conservative website Hot Air opined (Baker, 4/25).

CBS/Associated Press: Court Nixes Ken Cuccinelli's Bid To Block Health Care Law: What Now For Consumers?
A leading opponent of the health care law has gotten the cold shoulder from the Supreme Court. The court on Monday turned down a request from Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia to depart from its usual practice and "fast track" review of the controversial law. As a result, judicial review of President Obama's signature legislation — which Cuccinelli said had created "cripping and costly uncertainty" — will continue in federal appeals courts (Freeman, 4/25).

Politico Pro: Should The Individual Mandate Be Served?
What's left of the Affordable Care Act if there is no individual mandate to buy insurance? Supporters and opponents of the health reform law are increasingly grappling with that question as lawyers prepare for oral arguments in four separate cases that will reach federal appeals courts this summer. It's the follow up questions that judges — and potentially the Supreme Court — will have to tackle immediately if the mandate is declared unconstitutional: Can the rest of the law remain intact, as Judge Henry E. Hudson kept it in Virginia? Or does the whole law have to go down too, a la Judge Roger Vinson in Florida? The decision could have vast policy and political implications (Haberkorn, 4/26). 

Related from KHN: Scoreboard: Tracking Health Law Court Challenges (Vaida, 4/25).