Construction officials monitoring the Supreme Court's new term will be watching decisions in two environmental cases on the docket. Of greater interest is whether the court will hear high-profile health-care and immigration cases. Both would have major impacts on construction and other industries.
一个潜在的广泛案例涉及2010年的患者保护和负担得起的护理法。上诉法院就该法律挑战的裁决已被分歧。9月28日，司法部请高等法院推翻这样的裁决，该裁决发现，一项规定征收不保留最低健康健康水平的人的税收罚款是违宪的。相关总承包商总法律顾问迈克尔·肯尼迪（Michael Kennedy）无法预测法院可能听到的案件。但是，他说：“在您在[上诉法院]中有分歧的范围，这增加了最高法院接受它的可能性。”
Immigration may also be on the docket. On Aug. 10, Arizona asked the court to overturn a lower-court ruling blocking some provisions of its 2010 immigration law.
The court will hear oral arguments on Dec. 7 in PPL Montana v. Montana. The state claims the utility owes back rent for using river bottoms for hydroelectric projects. The utility says the river bottoms are not the state's to lease. A ruling for the state could discourage expansion of hydroelectric dams or other developments near or in rivers' non-navigable sections.
A date for oral arguments has not been set in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, which centers on an EPA compliance order in a wetland-filling action. Patti Goldman, Earthjustice vice president for litigation, says the issue the high court accepted is “really a procedural question” and won't address the underlying issue of defining federal waters. However, she says, “It may matter to [construction firms] because it's how the law will affect them, how they will be brought into compliance.”
On Oct. 3, the court let stand a lower-court ruling that the Clean Air Act doesn't supersede a California rule requiring cuts in emissions related to construction developments. It is a win for environmental groups and a defeat for the National Association of Home Builders, which sought a high-court review.
