The Missouri case was brought by eight plaintiffs, including St. Louis Effort for AIDS and Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri. Both have received federal funding to help with enrollment. PHOTOS: The battle over Obamacare U.S. District Judge Ortrie D. Smith said the restrictions were problematic for these two groups because Missouri, like 35 other states, has asked the federal government to operate its marketplace. (The remaining states are running their own marketplaces, or exchanges, as they are sometimes called.) It seems obvious these additional requirements obstruct the federal governments operation of the federal facilitated exchange, wrote Smith, who was appointed to the bench by President Clinton.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-obamacare-legal-victory-missouri-20140123,0,4213417.story
Target to part-timers: Get Obamacare
Some experts are concerned more companies will follow suit, though for now, changes remain at the margins. Many employers don’t offer health insurance to their part-time workforce. Starting in 2015, companies with more than 50 employees will have to provide coverage to full-time workers or face a $2,000 penalty. Most individuals, meanwhile, have to obtain health insurance this year or face a penalty of $95 or 1% of their income, whichever is greater. Target will provide a one-time $500 cash payment to part-time workers currently enrolled in the plan, which will cease April 1. And it has hired a benefits firm to provide them with support in signing up for alternate coverage.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/22/news/economy/target-health/index.html
Wonkbook: Is there an “insurer bailout” in Obamacare?
The Supreme Court is going to have to straighten this mess out Same-sex newlyweds sue Utah.”The legal saga in Utah over same-sex marriage grew even more complicated on Tuesday as four couples who had married during the brief window they could do so sued the state over its recent decision not to recognize their marriages or provide any new state benefits to same-sex newlyweds. The American Civil Liberties Union of Utah, which filed the lawsuit on their behalf, said that Utahs decision had thrown hundreds of new marriages into uncertainty, depriving gay couples of the ability to obtain health care coverage as spouses, to adopt children together legally or to make medical decisions if a spouse or family member were to fall ill.”Jack Healy in The New York Times . …And Florida.”Six same-sex couples inFloridahave filed a lawsuit challenging the states ban on gay marriage on grounds that it violates fundamental guarantees of theUSConstitution, including a right to marry regardless of sexual orientation…The 21-page complaint seeks to overturn two Florida laws, passed in 1977 and 1997, limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. It also seeks to invalidate a 2008 amendment to the Florida constitution defining marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife.”Warren Richey in the Christian Science Monitor . Meanwhile, Indiana moves one step in the other direction.”A hotly debated proposal to add a gay marriage ban to Indianas constitution passed its first hurdle of the 2014 legislative session Wednesday when a House committee voted in favor of the measure. A panel of 13 lawmakers on the House Elections and Apportionment Committee voted 9-3 along party lines to send the amendment, known as House Joint Resolution 3, to the full House.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/23/wonkbook-is-there-an-insurer-bailout-in-obamacare/