| Line 14: |
Line 14: |
| | *[[affirmative action]] case, on its second trip to the Supreme Court, in ''Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin'', No. 14-981 | | *[[affirmative action]] case, on its second trip to the Supreme Court, in ''Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin'', No. 14-981 |
| | *two voting rights cases, relating to the concept of "one man, one vote." ''Evenwel v. Abbott'', No. 14-940, and ''Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin'', No. 14-981. | | *two voting rights cases, relating to the concept of "one man, one vote." ''Evenwel v. Abbott'', No. 14-940, and ''Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin'', No. 14-981. |
| | + | *''Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company'', No. 14-181, which concerns the validity of a Vermont statute that forces health insurance companies to turn over confidential patient records to the State so that it can build a massive database about health care claims. |
| | + | ::From the Question Presented: |
| | + | :::Vermont, like many other States, requires health care providers and health care payers |
| | + | to provide claims data and related information to the State's health care database. The law |
| | + | applies to all public and private entities that pay for health care services, including insurers, |
| | + | government programs, and third-party administrators. The State relies on the database to |
| | + | inform health care policy. The question presented is: |
| | + | ::::Did the Second Circuit -in a 2-1 panel decision that disregarded the considered opinion |
| | + | advanced by the United States as amicus - err in holding that ERISA preempts Vermont's health |
| | + | care database law as applied to the third-party administrator for a self-funded ERISA plan? |
| | | | |
| | Perhaps surprisingly, there are no [[Fourth Amendment]] cases among the 35. | | Perhaps surprisingly, there are no [[Fourth Amendment]] cases among the 35. |