Showing 1–50 of 78 items published in December 2018, most recent first.
This is a case in which the more precise you think the statutory language is, the less obvious the right answer becomes. The question presented in Obduskey v. McCarthy Holthus LLP is whether the definition of “debt collector” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act includes attorneys who effect nonjudicial foreclosures.
Briefly: At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie notes that “[i]t has been a fairly quiet few months at the Supreme Court,” but “that may change as 2019 begins”: “The justices have already accepted three high-profile cases to be heard in the spring,” and their “next private
Chief Justice John Roberts released his annual report on the federal judiciary today, focusing on the judiciary’s response to allegations of sexual misconduct in the workplace.
On Friday the justices met for their January 4 conference; that afternoon, they added six cases to their merits docket: Rucho v. Common Cause, Lamone v. Benisek, Iancu v. Brunetti, Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, Taggart v. Lorenzen and United States v. Davis.
Briefly: At Bloomberg Law, Jordan Rubin reports on “the curious case of Bobby James Moore,” which “is knocking at the U.S. Supreme Court’s door again” after a state court found for a second time that Moore is not too intellectually disabled to be executed.
Civility and collegiality continued to be a theme in the Supreme Court justices’ appearances this month. On a December 7 visit to Duquesne University, Justice Sonia Sotomayor recounted a conversation about civility with the other justices.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, the constitutional adequacy of the “aggravating circumstances” used by a state to sentence a person to death, the scope of a defendant’s Sixth and 14th Amendment right to conflict-free counsel, and whether the use of a name is a “means of identification of another person” under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.
In an op-ed for The Hill, Kristen Waggoner weighs in on American Legion v. American Humanist Association, an establishment clause challenge to the placement on public land of a World War I memorial shaped like a cross, maintaining that “[t]he sight of a cross-shaped memorial to fallen heroes moves
How better to wrap up the calendar year than by examining the president’s take on his relationship with the Supreme Court – especially because the court was one of President Donald Trump’s favorite topics of discussion this past year?
Briefly: A.O. Scott reviews “On the Basis of Sex,” a new movie about the early career of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing in The New York Times that “[t]his is, almost literally, the story of how Ginsburg found her voice.” At Law and Liberty, Mark Pulliam argues that after last term’s decision
The Supreme Court is defined, in part, by court-watchers – those who chronicle its workings and analyze its jurisprudence. Our understanding of the court depends on scholars such as David M. O’Brien, the late Leone Reaves and George W. Spicer Professor at the University of Virginia’s Department of Politics.
Amy Howe reports for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court, that on Saturday “the Supreme Court was asked to step into a clash over a grand jury subpoena that is widely believed to be related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into interference in the 2016
Merry Christmas Eve! We at First Mondays have gotten you all the gift we know you’ve been wishing for: an unlocked bonus episode that was previous released exclusively to our Patreon backers. Last June, Dan Epps interviewed our first judicial guests at the Arizona State Bar Convention.
UPDATE: On Sunday evening, Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily blocked the district court’s order requiring the foreign corporation to comply with the grand jury subpoena or pay penalties.
Briefly: In an op-ed for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse considers what the justices’ recent refusal to hear “appeals by two states that had tried to terminate Planned Parenthood’s status as a Medicaid provider” “impli[es] for the future of the Roberts court.” At the U.S. Chamber Litigation
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had two cancerous growths removed from her left lung today, the Supreme Court’s public information office announced. After the surgery, which was performed at New York’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, there was no sign of any other growths in her lung, and Ginsburg is resting comfortably in her hospital room.
Last week the federal government went to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to block a ruling by a federal judge that bars the Trump administration from denying asylum to immigrants who enter the United States illegally from Mexico.
The Supreme Court released the calendar for its February sitting today. The justices will hear eight hours of oral argument over five days, including in two of the highest-profile cases of the term so far, involving factfinding in the dispute over the decision to add a question about citizenship to the census and a challenge to the constitutionality of a cross on public land.
Briefly: At Reason’s Hit and Run blog, Jacob Sullum writes that Tennessee Wine & Spirits Retailers Association v. Blair, a challenge to Tennessee’s durational residency requirements for liquor licensing that will be argued next month, “provides an opportunity for the Court to clarify the
In an overwhelming majority of the cases that the Supreme Court hears, the matter at issue has been adjudicated all the way through the lower courts, and comes to the justices only on the far side of a ruling by a federal court of appeals or the highest court of a state or territory.
At NPR, Nina Totenberg reports that “[a] specially appointed federal panel of judges has dismissed all 83 ethics complaints brought against Justice Brett Kavanaugh regarding his conduct at his confirmation hearings,” “conclud[ing] that while the complaints ‘are serious,’ there is no existing
Shortly before his death in 1826, President John Adams was quoted as saying, “My gift of John Marshall to the people of the United States was the proudest act of my life.” Adams was one of the earliest exponents of the view that nominations to the Supreme Court form a very important part of any president’s legacy.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, when an “offer[] to sell” occurs under the Patent Act, the constitutionality of a court-martial of a retired military service member, and the correct legal standard for determining whether a lien is a “statutory lien” under the Bankruptcy Code.
Briefly: At Bloomberg Law, Jordan Rubin reports that “[p]rosecuting federal hate-crime charges after events such as mass shootings could get trickier if the U.S. Supreme Court rules for the defendant in a case getting more notice for its potential impact on President Donald Trump’s pardon power,”
The Supreme Court faces a crisis of legitimacy. The process of selecting new justices has become both contentious and overtly partisan, as illustrated by the Republican-controlled Senate’s refusal to hold hearings or a vote for President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, followed by the fractious hearings and party-line vote to replace “swing” Justice Anthony Kennedy with Brett Kavanaugh.
The following is a series of questions prompted by Stephanie Slater’s “Edward Terry Sanford: A Tennessean on the U.S. Supreme Court” (University of Tennessee Press, 2018).
At Bloomberg, Greg Stohr reports that “[t]he Trump administration is aggressively trying to take advantage of the U.S. Supreme Court’s new conservative majority, digging deep into the court’s rulebook to seek quick action on divisive issues.” Ariane de Vogue reports at CNN that “[t]he court, with
It’s an off week for the Supreme Court, so we’ve got another great ensemble cast to take a deep dive into issues that regularly come up on the show. Kate Shaw of Cardozo Law guest hosts with Leah Litman.
Last week the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to block a ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco in a challenge to a new U.S. policy on asylum, announced last month as thousands of migrants moved from Central America towards the U.S. border.
The Supreme Court is between sittings. The justices will meet next for their January 4 conference; John Elwood’s Relist Watch compiles the petitions likely relisted for this conference. The calendar for the January sitting, which will begin on January 7, is available on the Supreme Court’s website.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, the applicability of the “commercial activity” exception to sovereign immunity in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to certain suits; whether the establishment clause precludes courts from
Amy Howe reports for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court, that the federal government yesterday asked the Supreme Court to allow it to enforce the Trump administration’s ban on service in the military by transgender people while its appeals of adverse decisions in three cases play out in the lower courts.
Last month the Supreme Court announced that it would, for the second time, review a case from Virginia challenging the legislative districts drawn in 2011 for the state’s House of Delegates as the product of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering – the idea that legislators relied too much on race when drawing the maps.
A week ago we posted a survey soliciting reader feedback (which can be found here). We received many responses, and we’re grateful to everyone who took the time to answer. We will be considering your responses and suggestions in the days ahead.
Richard B. Katskee is Legal Director at Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Symbols have power. They communicate complex ideas, often more effectively and more forcefully than mere words. They are remembered for decades or even centuries. They speak to the heart, not just the head.
Lindsay See is the solicitor general of West Virginia, which led a group of 27 other states and the governor of Kentucky in a cert-stage amicus brief in support of the petitioners in The American Legion v. American Humanist Association.
Briefly: At CNBC, Tucker Higgins reports that “Justice Brett Kavanaugh has only been on the bench for two months, but a controversial decision announced this week has abortion opponents starting to worry that he may not be the ally on the high court that they expected.” Lyle Denniston reports at
This term, the Supreme Court will hear argument in its 100th case decided below by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court’s recent grant of Kisor v. Wilkie also marks the fourth case granted from the Federal Circuit this term.
Last month the Trump administration asked the justices to allow it to bypass the courts of appeals and immediately take up three cases (here, here and here) challenging the government’s ban on service in the military by most transgender individuals.
Heather L. Weaver is a senior staff attorney for the Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief at the American Civil Liberties Union. A 40-foot-tall Latin cross made of marble and cement stands on public property at one of the busiest intersections in Bladensburg, Maryland.
Luke Goodrich is Vice President and Senior Counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which filed a cert-stage amicus brief in support of the petitioners in The American Legion v. American Humanist Association. The most interesting thing about the Maryland Peace Cross case won’t be who wins.
Last month President Donald Trump blasted a ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco that blocked the government from enforcing a rule that would prohibit immigrants who enter the country illegally from requesting asylum.
Amy Howe reports for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court, that the Trump administration yesterday asked the Supreme Court to put a hold on a lower-court ruling that bars enforcement of a new policy prohibiting immigrants who enter the country illegally across the U.S.-Mexico border from requesting asylum.
John Elwood previews 2018’s last relists. [Editor’s Note: This post was updated on Wednesday afternoon to include two additional relists, Newton v. Indiana and Mathena v. Malvo.]
Marci A. Hamilton is Robert A. Fox Professor of Practice and Senior Resident Fellow of the Program for Research on Religion at the University of Pennsylvania.
Richard W. Garnett is Paul J. Schierl/Fort Howard Corporation Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame.
Yesterday the Supreme Court issued additional orders from its conference last Friday, adding one case to its merits docket. Amy Howe covers the order list for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court.
Briefly: For The New York Times, Adam Liptak takes a look at the history behind “an awkward and illuminating tradition at the Supreme Court: the group photographs prepared when a new justice joins the court.” As Amy Howe reports for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court, on
There are twice as many women in this episode as there were at the Supreme Court podium in the whole December sitting. Leah Litman and guest host Jaime Santos recap the week’s arguments with two special guests.
Last week the justices added one new case to their merits docket for the term – a relatively obscure maritime-law case.