Showing 1–50 of 80 items published in September 2019, most recent first.
At Forbes, Nick Sibilla writes that the court’s decision this term in Hernandez v. Mesa, a case arising from a Mexican family’s efforts to hold a U.S. Border Patrol agent liable for the shooting death of their son, who was on the Mexican side of the border, could “have a drastic impact on victims
On the first Monday in October, the justices will hear argument in Peter v. NantKwest. Although this is not one of the most controversial cases on the court’s docket this fall, we can trust that the justices’ summer break will leave them sufficiently rested to give it the attention it deserves.
This week on SCOTUStalk, Amy Howe of Howe on the Court chats with Tony Mauro, who recently retired after nearly four decades covering the Supreme Court, about what he saw on the Supreme Court beat – from the justices’ deciding a presidential election to contentious confirmation hearings – and what he was hoping to see – from better recruitment of minority law clerks to cameras in the courtroom.
For over a century, a criminal defendant in Louisiana (except in capital cases) could be convicted without a unanimous verdict from the jury. In 2018, the state’s voters repealed the non-unanimity rule, leaving Oregon as the only state in the nation that does not require a unanimous verdict.
On Friday, the Supreme Court released orders from its October 1 conference. The justices granted five cases for a total of three hours of oral argument. The October 2019 term will begin on Monday, October 7. The calendar for the October sitting is available on the court’s website.
Next week the justices will return to the bench for the first time since the end of June. The new term is already full of interesting cases, including the very first one on Monday, October 7: Kahler v. Kansas, in which the Supreme Court will consider whether the Constitution allows a state to abolish the insanity defense.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, the constitutionality of Ohio’s elevated burden of proof for certain criminal defendants seeking a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence; whether the enforcement of generally applicable
Briefly: For The Economist, Steven Mazie reports that a “bundle of hot-button controversies await the nine” justices “when the Supreme Court returns to work on October 7th,” following “four tumultuous years that saw one death, a retirement, three pitched Senate confirmation battles, two new
A subcommittee of the U. S. House Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing yesterday on public access to the federal courts – the second hearing on ethics, accountability and transparency in a 21st-century federal judiciary.
At Lambda Legal, Gregory Nevins details the litigation strategy that led to three upcoming Supreme Court cases that ask whether federal law protects employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
The death penalty has generated dispute and controversy at the Supreme Court for decades. This past term was nothing new.
For USA Today, Richard Wolf reports that “[a]s his Supreme Court prepares for a contentious term featuring cases on immigration, gay and lesbian rights, gun ownership and, in all likelihood, abortion, [Chief Justice John] Roberts can look forward to opposition from the left and distrust from the
Ellen S. Podgor is the Gary R. Trombley Family White-Collar Crime Research Professor and Professor of Law at Stetson University College of Law. The circumstances surrounding the “Bridgegate” controversy are appalling.
Since fall of 2017, court watchers with Apple devices have been able to access SCOTUSblog content – posts, case pages, stat packs, special features, videos, the court’s calendar and more – on the go via our free iOS app.
Jennifer Ahearn is Policy Director and Noah Bookbinder is Executive Director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee.” These words, from a 2013 email written by petitioner Bridget Kelly, former deputy chief of staff to New Jersey
On Tuesday, October 1, at 5:45 p.m. EDT in Washington, D.C., the American Enterprise Institute will host a panel to discuss how Chief Justices John Marshall, Earl Warren and John Roberts have affected the decisions and the role of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court cleared the way for the execution of Robert Sparks, who has been sentenced to die by lethal injection in Texas for the brutal triple murder of his wife and two stepsons.
At Dorf on Law, Eric Segall reviews Justice Neil Gorsuch’s new book, “A Republic, If You Can Keep It.” Daniel Cotter discusses the book in a column for the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (subscription required), and Sarah McConnell covers Gorsuch’s recent book-tour stop in Austin, Texas, at The Texan.
Randall D. Eliason teaches white-collar criminal law at The George Washington University Law School and is a contributing columnist at the Washington Post. The line between political mischief and criminal corruption can be blurry.
At 10 a.m. EDT on Wednesday, October 2 – the day after the “long conference” – in Washington, D.C., the Washington Legal Foundation will host an event previewing the 2019 Supreme Court term, featuring advocates Lisa Blatt of Williams & Connolly and Akin Gump’s Pratik Shah, moderated by Jay Stephens of Kirkland & Ellis and WLF.
Frank Bowman is the Floyd R. Gibson Missouri Endowed Professor of Law at the University of Missouri Law School and Visiting Professor at Georgetown Law Center. My concerns with Kelly v. United States are two. First, the Supreme Court should not have granted certiorari.
Tomorrow, September 25, at 12:45 p.m. EDT in New York City, NYU Law will host a panel discussing the Supreme Court’s makeup as well as major cases from the previous and upcoming terms.
Briefly: For USA Today, Richard Wolf reports that “the woman fondly known as the “Notorious RBG” is traveling the nation giving speeches, staging conversations and accepting awards and honorary degrees[:] By demonstrating her vitality before adoring audiences, she hopes to tamp down concerns about
For residents of Fort Lee, New Jersey, the first day of school in September 2013 was a memorable one – and not in a good way. The traffic patterns on the George Washington Bridge, which crosses the Hudson River into New York at Fort Lee, had been abruptly altered, so that only one lane (instead of the normal three) was reserved for drivers accessing the bridge from Fort Lee.
On Friday, October 4, at 12:00pm ET in Washington, D.C., the Pacific Legal Foundation and National Review Institute will co-host a preview of upcoming cases, including new grants from the October 1 “long conference,” at the Supreme Court.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, whether a school district’s decision to educate a child with disabilities outside the regular classroom violates the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s mainstreaming mandate and whether a
Briefly: For The Washington Post, Teddy Amenobar tells the story behind a new mural of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on a Washington, D.C., wall that shows the justice “wearing her judicial robes with a signature decorative collar, smiling as she gazes toward the U Street corridor.” Trialdex previews
The following is a series of questions posed by Ronald Collins to Jane Nitze and David Feder in connection with Justice Neil Gorsuch’s “A Republic, If You Can Keep It,” co-authored by Nitze and Feder.
At noon in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, October 2, the day after the “long conference,” the Federalist Society will host a panel to preview the 2019 Supreme Court term, featuring Professor Josh Blackman of South Texas College of Law, Wiley Rein’s Megan Brown, Professor Robert Cottrol of George
At Reuters’ On the Case blog (via How Appealing), Alison Frankel writes that “[o]n Tuesday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau joined the Justice Department in a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider whether the CFPB’s structure is unconstitutional”; she notes that “the CFPB has
Eric Rassbach is Vice President and Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily represent those of the Becket Fund or its clients.
Daniel Mach is Director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the Supreme Court will address a question that would have been unthinkable even to ask until quite recently: Can a state be forced to underwrite religious education with taxpayer dollars?
At Bloomberg, Greg Stohr reports that yesterday “[t]he Trump administration urged the U.S. Supreme Court to give the president more control over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the agency that regulates mortgages and credit cards,” “[a]sking the court to take up a pending appeal” and to
Richard W. Garnett is Paul J. Schierl/Fort Howard Corporation Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame.
On Wednesday, September 25, from 12 noon until 1:20 p.m.
Frank S. Ravitch is Professor of Law and Walter H. Stowers Chair in Law & Religion at Michigan State University College of Law. In 2017, SCOTUSblog published a symposium on Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer.
For The Washington Post, Seung Min Kim reports that recent “revelations about the process” followed in investigating allegations of sexual misconduct against Justice Brett Kavanaugh during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing last year have “renewed a bitter debate about how his confirmation was
Jim Kelly is President of Solidarity Center for Law and Justice, P.C., and Founder and General Counsel of Georgia GOAL Scholarship Program, Inc., Georgia’s largest K-12 tax credit student scholarship program.
Alice O’Brien is General Counsel at the National Education Association. The Supreme Court in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue faces the question of whether, and if so to what degree, the federal free exercise clause restricts how states provide quality K-12 education systems.
The Library of Congress has created a new website for its Constitution Annotated, known officially as the “Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation.” For over 100 years, Constitution Annotated has served as the authoritative source for the American public to learn about the nation’s founding document alongside Supreme Court decisions that have expounded upon and refined it.
At The New York Times, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly explore allegations of sexual misconduct against Justice Brett Kavanaugh that surfaced during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing last year.
Two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that Missouri’s policy of excluding churches from a program to provide grants to resurface playgrounds violated the Constitution.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, whether federal courts have the authority to impose partial filing fees on habeas petitioners, whether a federal removal statute is unconstitutional under the suspension clause as applied to the
At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie writes that Wednesday’s ruling allowing the government to enforce a restrictive asylum policy pending appeal gave President Donald Trump “fodder for a triumphant tweet … and a fresh reminder that the Supreme Court appears to increasingly be
On Thursday, September 12, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg renewed her annual commitment to speak to first-year law students at the Georgetown University Law Center, whose faculty included her late husband, Marty Ginsburg.
Elizabeth Murrill is the Solicitor General of Louisiana. The federal government should prevail in the DACA cases for one straightforward reason: DACA is unlawful.
Melissa Crow is a senior supervising attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Immigrant Justice Project.
“Courts and Culture: Examining the Establishment Clause post-Bladensburg and a Supreme Court Preview on the Future of Title VII” Monday, September 16, 12:30 p.m.
The Supreme Court issued its calendar for the December sitting today. The justices are scheduled to kick off the sitting, which begins on Monday, December 2, with the oral argument in the challenge to New York City’s ban on transporting guns outside the city’s limits.
Amy Howe reports at Howe on the Court that the Supreme Court last night “gave the government the go-ahead to enforce a new rule that would bar most immigrants from applying for asylum if they pass through another country – such as Mexico – without seeking asylum there before arriving in the United