Senators’ briefs rejected
The D.C. Circuit Court, pondering the meaning of the court-stripping law passed late last year by Congress (the Detainee Treatment Act), has refused to accept three senators’ attempts to help shape the ruling.
March 2006 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 76 items published in March 2006, most recent first.
Direct appeal on NSA spying?
Lawsuits already are pending in federal trial courts to challenge the Bush Administration’s once-secret program of extending National Security Agency electronic eavesdropping to some calls involving Americans within the U.S. Now, a proposal has been made in Congress that seeks to assure a fast resolution by the Supreme Court of the legal and constitutional questions that have been raised about the program.
Blog Round-Up – Thursday, March 30th
Here is Sentencing Law & Policy on oral arguments in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon and Bustillo v. Johnson. The cases concern the enforceability of the Vienna Convention’s promise of consular access for foreign defendants. Here is Opinio Juris on the cases.
Moussaoui jury deliberates
The federal court jury in the death penalty proceeding against convicted terrorist conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui is in its second day of deliberations. The jury at this stage is considering only whether Moussaoui is eligible for a possible death sentence.
Appeal unlikely on gay marriage ruling
Massachusetts’ highest state court, in a ruling Thursday against marriage licenses for most out-of-state gay couples who seek to get married in the state, decided one federal constitutional issue.
Televising the Court?
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved for Senate consideration a bill that would direct the Supreme Court to permit television coverage of its public sessions. The bill also seeks to dictate what the Court would have to do to keep the cameras out case by case.
Analysis: how to enforce an international right
The Supreme Court, confronting for a second time in a year the rights of foreign nationals caught up in U.S. criminal cases, went searching on Wednesday for ways to remedy violations of the right under the Vienna Convention to get the aid of a diplomat from a suspect’s home country.
Analysis: no penalty for patent “trolls”
When first-rate advocates face off in a Supreme Court argument, it often is difficult to say who had the better of the argument, or who came closest to winning a majority.
Hamdan transcript
The transcript of Tuesday’s hearing in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (05-184) is now available, and can be found here. (Thanks to a reader who supplied the link.)
Hamdan and Recusal
A quick note: Hamdan’s counsel have been asked by various reporters regarding our position on the recusal of Justice Scalia from the case in light of the letter suggesting recusal that was filed today. As Lyle indicates below, we take no position on the issue.
Tuesday’s Argument in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
This post was written by Stanford Law Student Scott Reents. Disclosure: Goldstein & Howe is co-counsel for petitioner. Petitioner Salid Ahmed Hamdan is a detainee being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
No Opinions Today
Title says it all.
Kennedy & O’Connor at Stanford Law School
Earlier this month, the Stanford Law Review sponsored a symposium on the legacy of two of its most famous alums, the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist and former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
Recent Cert. Petition
Yesterday we filed this cert. petition in Medeiros v. Sullivan, which presents the question whether individuals are categorically prohibited from raising Tenth Amendment challenges to a federal government’s commandeering of a state government.
Two Blog Posts Related to the Hamdan Oral Argument
Here is The Pocket Part on the case with an article by Neal Katyal. Here is a Slate article on the case by Ariel Lavinbuk, one of the law students who worked on it.
Analysis: Hard day for government in Hamdan case
With Justice Antonin Scalia taking part — and, in fact, providing the only clearcut signs of unstinting support for the federal government’s arguments — the Supreme Court on Tuesday probed deeply into the validity of the war crimes tribunals set up by President Bush, and came away looking decidedly skeptical.
Audio of Hamdan Oral Argument
The good folks here at the Georgetown University Law Center have put the audio of today’s oral argument in Hamdan up on our website: It can be found here.
Analysis: Hamdan and the prospects of tie votes
On Tuesday morning, at 11 o’clock or a few minutes after, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., is expected to rise from the bench, and depart from the courtroom.
Court to hear habeas case
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to rule on one new case — a test of the one-year filing deadline for pursuing a habeas challenge in federal court. The main issue, in the case of Lawrence v. Florida (05-8820, is whether the filing period is suspended while a state prison inmate has a post-conviction petition for review pending in the Supreme Court.
Orders
Here is today’s orders list and here is an interesting opinion concurring in the denial of cert. filed by Justice Scalia and joined by Justice Alito.
Scalia asked to step aside
Five retired generals and admirals, taking part as friends-of-the-court in the war-on-terrorism case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, on Monday asked Justice Antonin Scalia to step aside when the Supreme Court considers Hamdan’s challenge to the war-crimes tribunals named “military commissions.” Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (05-184) is to be argued Tuesday.
Justice Scalia Announces Opposition to Trials in Civil Courts for Alien Military Detainees
Just over two weeks ago, on March 8th, Justice Scalia gave a speech at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland, the school at which he spent his junior year abroad in the mid-1950’s.
Blog Round-Up – Sunday, March 26th
Here the Volokh Conspiracy has a post on Granholm v. Heald. Here Sentencing Law & Policy ponders the re-argument in Kansas v. Marsh. Here Orin Kerr blogs about this tribute to Justice O’Connor. Here Professor Kerr blogs about Georgia v. Randolph.
Monday’s Argument, Anza v. Ideal Steel
On Monday, the Court will hear arguments in Anza v. Ideal Steel (No. 04-433).
Another Re-Argument
The Court today ordered re-argument in No. 04-1170, Kansas v. Marsh. Originally at issue in the case is the question of the constitutionality of Kansas’s death penalty statute, which provides that the death penalty will be imposed if the sentencing jury determines that the aggravating and mitigating factors are in equipoise; the Court also ordered additional briefing regarding its jurisdiction to consider the case.
Blog Round-Up – Wednesday, March 21st
The latest edition of The Pocket Part, on “The Most Dangerous Branch?” is now online. Concurring Opinions has this post on Merrill Lynch v. Dabit. Concurring Opinions also has this post responding to this post by Stephen Bainbridge on the Supreme Court, federalism and securities law.
Analysis: Hamdan and a few minutes in the Senate
In the few minutes that it took the Senate to complete passage of the Detainee Treatment Act last Dec. 21, little was said in the chamber beyond a round of congratulations for a job well done.
Tomorrow’s Argument in Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales
Note: This post was authored by Michael Kaufman, a second-year student at Stanford Law School. Tomorrow, the Court will revisit the murky waters of the retroactive application of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) when it hears arguments in Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales.
Tomorrow’s Argument in Woodford v. Ngo
Note: This post was authored by Angie Cha, a second-year student at Stanford Law School. The second argument on Wednesday is Woodford et al. v. Ngo, No. 05-416.
Court limits search power
The Supreme Court ruled 5-3 on Wednesday that it is unconstitutional for police without a warrant to search a home, if two occupants are present at the time and one consents but the other objects.
Opinions in Georgia v. Randolph
Here are the opinions in Georgia v. Randolph: majority, Stevens concurrence, Breyer concurrence, Chief dissent, Scalia dissent, Thomas dissent.
Moussaoui seeks to limit testimony
Defense lawyers for Zacarias Moussaoui on Tuesday asked the trial judge in his death penalty trial to limit the testimony that government witnesses may use to justify a capital sentence, barring them from talking about his failure to reveal information to an FBI agents after his arrest prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Court limits securities lawsuits
The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that investors may not sue for securities fraud in a class action lawsuit based on state law, even if the claim is only that they were induced to hold on to their stocks, not to buy or sell.
Hamdan hearing to be broadcast
Broadcast networks will be able to provide next Tuesday, March 28, the audio recording of the 90-minute oral argument in the “military commission” case, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (05-184).
Tomorrow’s Argument in Hammon v. Indiana
Note: This post was authored by Pete Patterson, a third-year student at Stanford Law School. In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court held that a witness’s out-of-court testimonial statement cannot be presented at trial against a criminal defendant unless the witness is unavailable to testify and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
No new grants
The Supreme Court released its orders on Monday morning; no new cases were granted review. The Court also took no action on the pending war-on-terrorism appeal by Jose Padilla. The Court’s electronic docket shows that the case of Padilla v .
Order List
The order list (which, as Lyle notes below, has no new grants) is available here.
Blog Round-Up- Monday, March 20th
Here and here, Concurring Opinions has posts on Zacarias Moussaoui’s new filing before Judge Brinkema. Also on Concurring Opinions is this post by Kaimipono D. Wenge titled, “Lawrence, FAIR, Scalia, and the “Homosexual Agenda” Here is Jack Balkin on the Solomon Amendment case.
Briefing now complete in detainees’ cases
The Justice Department on Friday evening filed the fnal brief in the D.C. Circuit Court on the impact of the new Detainee Treatment Act on the pending challenges to detention by foreign nationals being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Judge eases Moussaoui evidence ban
(UPDATE: Both the prosecution and defense agreed on Friday night that a further hearing be held in the Moussaoui case to explore more fully the actions of a government lawyer that earlier in the week threatened to undermine much of the government’s case for a death sentence.
New proposal on NSA surveillance
Four Republican Senators on Thursday proposed new legislation that would give the President clear authority to authorize electronic surveillance that could reach Americans as part of investigations of suspected terrorists, and to do so without a court order “for periods of up to 45 days” and perhaps longer.
Moussaoui defends sanctions order
Defense lawyers for Zacarias Moussaoui, facing a potential death penalty for a conspiracy related to the 2001 terrorist attacks, on Thursday urged a federal judge to make no change in her order blocking about half of the federal government’s case in support of a death sentence.
Recent Filing
Last week we filed an amicus brief on behalf of the National Women’s Law Center and 29 other amici in support of the respondent in Burlington Northern v. White, No. 05-259. The brief was prepared in conjunction with the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.
Balkin, Rumsfeld v. FAIR, and Schools’ Right to Protest the Military (Commentary)
Jack Balkin has written what is (in my admittedly biased opinion) the most interesting and informative post yet published in the blogosphere on the Rumsfeld v. FAIR case, explaining, among other things, why some professors such as Jack, who shared my skepticism of, and discomfort with, the plaintiffs’ constitutional arguments, nevertheless joined in the litigation.
Penry case returns
A familiar case — the death row saga of Texan Johnny Paul Penry — and an even more familiar issue — jury instructions in death penalty cases — have returned to the Supreme Court in a new appeal by the state of Texas.
Hamdan Reply Brief
Today, petitioner’s counsel filed the Reply Brief in the Hamdan case. It can be found here.
Government moves to salvage Moussaoui case
The Justice Department moved swiftly on Wednesday to try to salvage a crucial part of its death penalty case against Zacarias Moussaoui, the only individual charged in the U.S. with a crime growing out of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Setback for U.S. on Moussaoui
UPDATE: The Justice Department said Tuesday afternoon that it had asked for and obtained a recess of the death penalty proceeding until Monday. Tasia Scolinos, public affairs director for the Department, said in a statement: “The Justice Department is in the process of carefully reviewing Judge Brinkema’s decision…” The trial was to have resumed Wednesday morning.
Blog Round-Up
UPDATE: Here on LegalTimes.com is a transcript from an online chat with Legal Times’ Supreme Court Correspondent Tony Mauro. Here is a Concurring Opinions post on Chief Justice Roberts´ first opinions.
Lawyers joust over Moussaoui death penalty issues
(This is another in a continuing series of reports on the aftermath of Supreme Court opinions and orders. On March 21 of last year, the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by Zacarias Moussaoui, the only individual charged in the U.S. with a crime related to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
12