Today’s News – April 29, 2005
Tony Mauro of Legal Times has this article on the Court’s hottest ticket this Term. Newsday has this AP article on the aftermath of the Court’s decision in City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation.
April 2005 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 69 items published in April 2005, most recent first.
No Opinions This Coming Monday
Order List only. The remaining scheduled dates for issuance of opinions are May 16th, 23d and 31st, and each of the four Mondays in June. (If needed, the Court might add further dates between June 21st and June 30th.) By my rough count, 35 argued cases remain pending without decision.
Government Submits Opening Appellate Brief in Rasul-on-Remand
The Acting Solicitor General has filed the Government’s opening appellate brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Al Odah v. United States (Nos. 05-5064, 05-5095 through 05-5116), which is in essence the Rasul case on remand — a habeas challenge brought by numerous alien detainees at Guantanamo.
Clement’s SG Confirmation Hearing
There may be a great deal of acrimony and debate on Capitol Hill about some of the President’s nominations–but the nomination of Acting SG Paul Clement to be Solicitor General isn’t one of them.
Tomorrow’s Argument in Arthur Andersen v. United States
The lone case to be argued tomorrow is No. 04-368, Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, in which the accounting firm will challenge its witness tampering conviction. You can read Scott Meisler’s excellent summary of the case, which was posted last week on SCOTUSBlog, here.
Wide opening for pesticide damage claims
The Supreme Court on Wednesday created a wide opening for consumers of weed-killing and pest-killing products to sue manufacturers under state law for defectively designing their products, and failing to live up to their promises of what the products will do.
Wednesday’s Opinions
The Court issued opinions this morning in the following two cases, which Lyle describes in further detail below: No. 03-388, Bates v. Dow AgroSciences, vacated and remanded. The opinion was written by Justice Stevens. Justice Breyer filed a one-paragraph concurrence.
A victory for Andersen?
By common agreement among those contacted after listening to Wednesday’s oral argument in Arthur Andersen LLP v. U.S. (03-368), the now nearly defunct accounting firm is likely to emerge with a sweeping victory in the challenge to its “witness-tampering” conviction.
Tuesday’s Argument in American Trucking Associations v. Michigan Public Service Commission
In the consolidated cases of American Trucking Associations, Inc., and USF Holland, Inc. v. Michigan Public Service Commission and Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc. v. Michigan Public Service Commission, trucking companies have challenged various provisions of the Michigan Motor Carrier Act (MCA) that require them to pay two types of annual fees for their vehicles.
Two criminal law rulings
The Supreme Court ruled 5-3 on Tuesday that conviction in a foreign court — in this case, in Japan — is not the kind of conviction which U.S. law treats as a basis for denying an individual a right to possess a gun.
Tomorrow’s Argument in No. 04-6432, Gonzalez v. Crosby
Tomorrow in No. 04-6432, Gonzalez v. Crosby, the Court will consider whether and to what extent a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) constitutes a second or successive application for habeas relief and is thus, except in certain narrowly defined circumstances, prohibited by the AEDPA.
Five cases granted review
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear five cases, including one that could have an impact on the coming sentencing hearing of admitted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui.
Order List
Can be found here.
Penalty trial for Moussaoui
This post is part of continuing coverage of the Moussaoui case following the Supreme Court’s denial of review. A federal judge in Alexandria, Va., on Monday told attorneys on both sides of the Zacarias Moussaoui terrorism case to come up with a proposed schedule for a death penalty trial.
Monday’s Argument in Halbert v. Michigan
Despite the contrary impression generated by popular depictions—such as Law & Order and CourtTV—it is a well-known fact of criminal justice that over ninety percent of defendants plead guilty without trial.
Upcoming Argument in Arthur Andersen v. United States
At the final oral argument of the October 2004 Term, the Supreme Court on Wednesday will consider whether the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP was properly convicted of violating the federal witness tampering statute, 18 U.S.C. 1512(b).
Today’s News – April 22, 2005
News on a discussion last night at the National Archives in which Justice O’Connor, Justice Scalia, and Justice Breyer participated: Stephen Henderson of Knight Ridder Newspapers; David Stout of The New York Times; Nina Totenberg of NPR; and Hope Yen of the AP.
Opinions Next Week
The Court will issue opinions in one or more argued cases on both Tuesday and Wednesday of next week (April 26th and 27th). Opinions are also possible the following Monday, May 2d, after which the next possible date for opinions will be May 16th.
Moussaoui pleads guilty, plea accepted
Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person charged in the U.S. with a crime for the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, on Friday pleaded guilty to all six conspiracy counts alleging he had a role in the plot that resulted in nearly 3,000 deaths that day.
Today’s News – April 21, 2005
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal has this article on the Court’s opinion in Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo. News on oral arguments, heard yesterday, in Merck v. Integra LifeSciences: Toby Eckert of Copley New Service; Tony Mauro of Legal Times; Hope Yen of the AP on FindLaw; and this Bloomberg report in The Boston Globe.
Pending Cert. Petition: No. 04-820, Acree v. Iraq
One of the petitions to be considered at the Court’s conference tomorrow is No. 04-820, Acree v. Iraq, which presents the questions whether U.S. citizens who have been tortured by a state sponsor of terrorism have causes of action (a) under either federal or state law; and (b) for a violation of universally accepted international norms against torture.
Oral Arguments: Wednesday, April 20
The Court will hear oral arguments in two cases tomorrow. The first case, No. 03-1327, Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences, presents the question whether the FDA’s “safe harbor” provision protects the preclinical studies that generally accompany the application to the FDA that must be made before testing a new drug on humans.
Today’s News – April 20, 2005
News on the Court’s opinion, issued yesterday, in Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo: Dan Ackman of Forbes; Joan Biskupic of USA Today; Bonnie Eslinger of The San Francisco Examiner; Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times; Tony Mauro of Legal Times; David G. Savage of The L.A. Times; Patti Waldmeir of Financial Times; and Dana Wilkie of Copley News Service.
Analysis: Reversal coming in patent case?
An opaque and frequently meandering hearing in the Supreme Court Wednesday on a major dispute over drug patents left the impression that pharmaceutical research laboratories may get more legal protection than the Court of Appeals-Federal Circuit was prepared to give them.
Huge tobacco case seems Court-bound
A 3-3 split in the D.C. Circuit on Wednesday, denying rehearing en banc on a key remedies issue in the government’s massive and long-running lawsuit against the tobacco industry, probably will be the signal for the Bush Administration to move on to the Supreme Court.
Judge: Moussaoui competent to plead guilty
(Note: The Supreme Court on March 21 refused to hear an appeal in this case.) The federal judge presiding over the only criminal case brought in the U.S. for the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, ruled on Wednesday that Zacarias Moussaoui “is fully competent to plead guilty to the indictment.” She scheduled a “change of plea hearing” for Friday afternoon in Alexandria, Va.
Today’s Oral Arguments
The first case to be argued today is No. 04-637, Bradshaw v. Stumpf.
One decision: on securities law
The Supreme Court, in the only decision announced Tuesday, clarified the proof that a securities investor must offer to plead a fraud-on-the-market theory. No other decisions are expected this week.
Opinion links
Lyle discusses the Dura opinion below. Here are the syllabus and Justice Breyer’s unanimous opinion.
David Garrow on Harry Blackmun
Legal Affairs has posted David Garrow’s piece on the role of Harry Blackmun’s law clerks in his jurisprudence, as well as two responses. Garrow is harshly critical of Blackmun based on his review of the Blackmun papers, and the responses are harshly critical of Garrow (who presumably may respond in the future).
Today’s News – Tuesday, April 19, 2005
News on yesterday’s oral arguments in Johnson v. California: Nathaniel Hoffman of Contra Costa Times; Michael McGough of The Post-Gazette National Bureau; David G. Savage of The L.A. Times; and Erica Werner of the AP in The Boston Globe.
Three cases granted review
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to rule on the federal government’s power to ban the religious use of a herbal tea that officials claim contains a hallucinogenic substance. (Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal, et al., docket 04-1084).
Orders List (and a CVSG)
Here is today’s Order List. In addition to the grants, the Court also invited the SG to file a brief expressing the views of the United States in No. 04-1049, Carpenters Health and Welfare Trust for Southern California v. Vonderharr, a case involving the availability of monetary relief under ERISA section 502(a)(3).
In Chambers Opinion
Justice Kennedy has this opinion denying a stay in an interesting case in which a news organization claimed it feared prosecution for publishing grand jury transcripts. In sum, Justice Kennedy denies the stay because he concluded there was no realistic prospect of prosecution.
The RFRA Hoasca Tea Case
Back in December, I made a post to the old SCOTUSblog site describing the court of appeals’ decision in the hoasca tea case — a decision that the Supreme Court this morning decided to review.
Transcripts, Orders, Opinions, Arguments
All of the transcripts from late-March arguments, other than Wilkinson v. Austin, are now available here, incluidng the transcripts from Cutter, Medellin and Grokster. The Court will issue an Order List on Monday, and opinions in one or more argued cases on Tuesday.
Today’s News – Friday, April 15, 2005
Tony Mauro of Legal Times has this article discussing the increase in amicus brief filings at the Court. Kristine Pordesimo has this article in The Vanderbilt Hustler on Justice Scalia’s speech at Vanderbilt’s Law School.
Upcoming Argument in Bradshaw v. Stumpf
The first case to be argued Tuesday, April 19th is No. 04-637, Bradshaw v. Stumpf. The case (arguably poorly) presents two questions. First, whether a representation on the record from defendant’s counsel and/or the defendant that defense counsel has explained the elements of the charge to the defendant is sufficient to show the voluntariness of the guilty plea under Henderson v. Morgan.
Today’s Federalist Society Program
The Federalist Society is holding this panel today on government speech doctrine, focusing on the “beef checkoff” case now pending before the Court. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Howe for respondents in the case, and Tom Goldstein will be on the panel.]
Pending Petition
One of the interesting petitions up for consideration on May 12 is No. 04-1055, Safe Air for Everyone v. Meyer, a RCRA case dealing with the definition of “solid waste” in which Richard Lazarus of Georgetown Law School is lead counsel to the petitioner. Here are the petition, opposition, and reply.
Today’s News – Thursday, April 14, 2005
Tony Mauro of Legal Times has this article on Monday’s congressional hearing on the Court’s budget. Marya Lucas of Legal Times has this article on Friday’s conference, specifically on Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal.
Commentary: gay marriage in Oregon
(This is one of a series of occasional reports on gay rights issues in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas in June 2003.)
Firm Developments
Congratulations to Meaghan McLaine (who was a summer associate with us last year) on receiving a clerkship with Justice Souter next term, and to Brian Fletcher (who will be with us this coming summer) on being elected the President of the Harvard Law Review. Really wonderful news.
Today’s News – Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal has this article on Merck KGAA v. Integra LifeSciences. News on a congressional hearing on the Court’s budget: Joan Biskupic of USA Today; Tony Mauro of Legal Times; Nina Totenberg of NPR; Hope Yen of the AP in The Guardian; and Reuters has this report.
Upcoming Argument in Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences
On Wednesday, April 20, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences, No. 03-1237, an important intellectual property case that will help define the boundary between patent infringement and protected scientific research.
A Second Chance for Gregory Thompson?
On April 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Bell v. Thompson, No. 04-514.
Today’s News – April 12, 2005
Jonathan Saltzman of The Boston Globe has this article on Kettenbach v. Demoulas, No. 04-1257. Julie Hilden has this essay on FindLaw discussing Tory v. Cochran. Sol Wachtler and David Gould have this opinion piece in Newsday on the Ten Commandments cases.
New Cert. Filing
David Gossett of Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw has filed this interesting and promising immigration-related cert. petition.
Pasquantino
The White Collar Crime blog of the Law Professors blog network has this post on the Pasquantino “revenue rule” case.
Recent Filing
On Friday we filed this cert. amicus brief in No. 04-1196, Kelley v. Crosby, a Florida capital case.
12