This week at the court
The court issued orders from its April 28 conference on Monday. It granted certiorari in two new cases. The court also released opinions in two argued cases on Monday. The justices will meet next for their May 11 conference.
April 2017 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 104 items published in April 2017, most recent first.
Now accepting internship applications (Deadline today)
SCOTUSblog is still accepting applications from current law students interested in interning with us. The principal focus of the internship (which is a paid one) will be assisting with the “Petition of the day” and “Petitions to watch” features on the blog and maintaining the case pages.
Argument analysis: The Supreme Court struggles with the ACA’s patent provisions
In a surprise to virtually no one, the oral argument in the consolidated patent cases Sandoz v. Amgen and Amgen v. Sandoz showed the Supreme Court struggling to understand both the highly complex patent provisions in the Affordable Care Act (aka the “Obamacare” statute) and the many procedural complexities of the underlying litigation.
Roberts, Georgetown Law honor counselor to the chief justice
With the final arguments of the Supreme Court term completed on Wednesday, Georgetown Law on Thursday held its traditional reception to thank participants in its moot court program and to recognize a special guest.
Friday round-up
At Reuters, Lawrence Hurley reports that during Wednesday’s argument in Maslenjak v. United States, an immigration case, Chief Justice John Roberts “took issue … with the Trump administration’s stance,” “saying it could make it too easy for the government to strip people of citizenship for lying
Arkansas executes fourth inmate in one week
Without any recorded dissents, the Supreme Court last night declined to block the execution of Kenneth Williams. Williams was the fourth inmate executed in Arkansas in a week; the state had sought to execute eight inmates over a span of 11 days so that it could carry out the executions before one of the drugs in its lethal injection protocol expired, but four other inmates had their executions stayed.
This week’s oral argument audio and transcripts now available on Oyez
Oyez has posted audio and transcripts from this week’s oral arguments at the Supreme Court. The court heard argument this week in: McWilliams v. Dunn Davila v. Davis Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. Maslenjak v. United States
Petitions to watch | Conference of April 28
In its conference of April 28, 2017, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether a statute which does not amend any generally applicable substantive or procedural laws, but deprives the petitioner of the right to pursue his pending lawsuit, violates the due process clause of
Argument analysis: Concerns about prosecutorial discretion likely to lead to ruling for Bosnian Serb in immigration case
At oral argument today in the U.S. Supreme Court, the justices were not especially sympathetic to the plight of Divna Maslenjak. The 53-year-old came to the United States as a refugee in 2000, fleeing ethnic strife in the former Yugoslavia.
Thursday round-up
Yesterday the court heard oral argument in Maslenjak v. United States, which asks whether a naturalized U.S. citizen can be stripped of her citizenship in a criminal proceeding based on an immaterial false statement. Amy Howe analyzes the argument for this blog.
Asterisk Watch
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relists. So in the April 7 edition, we trumpeted that that the newly installed Justice Neil Gorsuch would surely participate in his first conference on April 13. Wrong!
Opinion analysis: Justices decline to extend sovereign immunity to tribe employees
Today the Supreme Court held that the sovereign immunity of Indian tribes does not extend to suits against tribal employees when the employee, instead of the tribe, is the “real party in interest.” Lewis v. Clarke involved a run-of-the-mill car accident: The plaintiffs, Brian and Michelle Lewis,
Argument analysis: Justices cautious about validating California court’s jurisdiction over claims by out-of-state litigants against out-of-state defendants
Tuesday morning’s argument in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California brought the justices a case at the intersection of class actions and personal jurisdiction.
Wednesday round-up
Today the court hears oral argument in two cases. The first is Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. (consolidated with Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.), a complex case involving rules for the licensing of biosimilars. John Duffy previewed the case for this blog.
Argument transcripts
The transcript in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. is here; the transcript in Maslenjak v. United States is here.
Argument analysis: Justices seem inclined to avoid creating “an enormous hole in the doctrine of procedural default” in nested ineffective-assistance case
It probably was not a good sign for Houston criminal-defense attorney Seth Kretzer, arguing yesterday on behalf of petitioner Erick Davila in Davila v. Davis, when, early in his opening presentation, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested that the court could decide the case on narrower grounds than
Court denies stay to Arkansas inmate (FINAL UPDATE)
[Note: This post was updated to report on the execution of Jack Jones and to add additional information about the case of Marcel Williams, including the Supreme Court’s denial of his application for a stay of execution, the district court’s temporary stay, the lifting of that stay, and Williams’ execution.]
Tuesday round-up
Today the court hears oral argument in two cases. First up is Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, another civil procedure case involving a court’s specific jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants sued by out-of-state plaintiffs.
Argument analysis: Justices likely to hand victory to railroad in jurisdictional dispute
The Supreme Court seemed ready to hand a victory to railroad company BNSF in a lawsuit brought by two of the company’s injured workers.
Argument transcripts
The transcript in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County is here; the transcript in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell is here.
A “view” from the courtroom: Call waiting
It’s the penultimate day of arguments in this modest term, and after issuing its opinion in Lewis v. Clarke (about tribal sovereign immunity) and conducting bar admissions, the court is just a few minutes into the oral argument in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California (about personal jurisdiction).
Live blog of opinions (Update: Completed)
We live-blogged this morning as the court issues opinions. The transcript is available at this link.
Argument preview: Jurisdiction, precedent and the Federal Employers’ Liability Act
Three years ago, in Daimler AG v. Bauman, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution’s due process clause barred a lawsuit in California against the German car company for the actions of its Argentinian subsidiary, which allegedly worked with security forces in Argentina during the country’s “Dirty War” to kidnap, torture and kill some of the subsidiary’s workers.
Argument preview: The ACA returns to the Supreme Court (this time disguised as a hugely complex patent case)
On the last day of scheduled oral arguments in the term, the Affordable Care Act — the always controversial “Obamacare” statute — returns yet again to the Supreme Court, although many of the justices and their clerks will probably be wishing it weren’t so.
Monday round-up
Today the court hears oral argument in two cases. The first is McWilliams v. Dunn, which asks whether an Alabama defendant in a capital case whose mental health was at issue was entitled to assistance from a psychiatrist independent of the prosecution. Amy Howe previewed the case for this blog.
Today’s orders
For the second week in a row, the Supreme Court did not add any new cases to its merits docket for next term. The dearth of new grants is likely attributable to the fact that Justice Neil Gorsuch – who did not participate at all in last week’s conference – only participated in a handful of the orders issued today.
Argument transcripts
The transcript in McWilliams v. Dunn is here; the transcript in Davila v. Davis is here.
Argument analysis: Nine justices, with five votes for death row inmate?
Three decades ago, James McWilliams was convicted of the robbery, rape and murder of convenience store clerk Patricia Reynolds. An Alabama judge sentenced McWilliams to death, rejecting both his pleas to consult with an independent psychiatrist about psychiatric records that his attorney had recently received and his argument that he suffered from serious mental health issues.
This week at the court
The court issued orders from its April 21 conference on Monday. It did not grant certiorari in any new cases or call for the views of the solicitor general in any cases. On Tuesday, the court released its opinion in Lewis v. Clarke.
Court divides on Arkansas executions (UPDATED Friday, April 21, 6:10 a.m.)
[UPDATED: After temporarily staying inmate Ledell Lee’s additional appeals last night to give them more time to consider his new filings, the justices rejected Lee’s request to block his execution, clearing the way for Arkansas to execute Lee. Lee was executed shortly before midnight local time.]
Friday round-up
Last night the Supreme Court declined to block the executions of a group of Arkansas inmates, one of whom was executed shortly before midnight. Amy Howe covers the proceedings for this blog.
Relist Watch: Asterisk edition
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relists.
This week’s oral argument audio and transcripts now available on Oyez
Oyez has posted audio and transcripts from this week’s oral arguments at the Supreme Court.
Argument analysis: A genuinely undecided court on a difficult criminal procedure question
In the last oral argument of the week, in Weaver v. Massachusetts, the court confronted two seemingly incompatible lines of doctrine. When there is a “structural” error in a criminal trial, prejudice is often irrebuttably presumed and a new trial is ordered.
Opinion analysis: States can’t keep money they collect pursuant to subsequently overturned convictions
Sometimes, it’s hard to tell what a Supreme Court decision is about, or what the court has held, until well into the majority opinion.
Petitions to watch | Conference of April 21
In its conference of April 21, 2017, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether a state law that imposes retroactive tax liability for a period of almost seven years violates the due process clause; whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records
Thursday round-up
Yesterday the court heard argument in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, a constitutional challenge to Missouri’s exclusion of a church-run preschool from a state program that provides grants to nonprofits to resurface playgrounds. Amy Howe analyzes the argument for this blog.
Argument preview: Lies, damned lies, and citizenship
Until recently, 53-year-old Divna Maslenjak lived in Akron, Ohio, with her husband, Ratko. Ethnic Serbs who were raised in what is now Bosnia, the couple came to the United States with their children as refugees, fleeing ethnic strife in the former Yugoslavia.
Argument preview: What kind of help does the Constitution require for defendants in capital cases?
Image provided by James McWilliams’ counsel Thirty-one years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that a defendant who can show that his mental health is likely to play an important role at trial is entitled to help from a psychiatrist if he cannot afford it.
Argument analysis: Does a statute of limitations apply to SEC actions for disgorgement?
Big money is on the line, not just in Kokesh v. Securities and Exchange Commission, but in a number of cases in which the SEC seeks to force wrongdoers to disgorge gains ill-gotten in days of yore.
Argument analysis: Court dubious about reading Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to reach debt buyers
The bench was relatively quiet for yesterday morning’s argument in Henson v. Santander Consumer USA, allowing counsel on both sides to talk for long periods without interruption, suggesting if anything that the justices see a straightforward answer in the text of the governing statute.
Wednesday round-up
Today the court hears argument in two cases. The first is Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, a constitutional challenge to Missouri’s exclusion of a church-run preschool from a state program that provides grants to nonprofits to resurface playgrounds.
Argument analysis: Justices leaning toward a ruling for Trinity Lutheran on the merits
When the Supreme Court heard oral argument this morning in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, a Missouri church’s challenge to its exclusion from a state program that provides grants to nonprofits to allow them to resurface their playgrounds with recycled tires, all eyes were on the court’s newest justice, Neil Gorsuch.
Opinion analysis: Justices require notice of appeal from deferred restitution judgments
In retrospect, the only truly curious feature of Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision in Manrique v. United States is why it took so long.
Argument transcripts
The transcript in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer is here; the transcript in Weaver v. Massachusetts is here.
Menu of today’s content
Here is an overview of today’s case coverage: 10:25 a.m.: Ronald Mann analyzed yesterday’s argument in Henson v. Santander Consumer USA. 11:45 a.m.: Amy Howe previewed next Monday’s argument in McWilliams v. Dunn. 12:09 p.m.: Theresa Gabaldon analyzed yesterday’s argument in Kokesh v. Securities
Live blog of opinions (Update: Completed)
We live-blogged this morning as the court issued opinions. The transcript can be found at this link.
Argument preview: Justices to consider challenge to California court’s jurisdiction over claims by out-of-state litigants against out-of-state defendants
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County brings the justices once again to the thorny problems of personal jurisdiction: When is it appropriate for a court in one state to exercise jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants?
Argument analysis: Pulling wings off flies and other efforts to make sense of the Civil Service Reform Act
Aggressive questioning and a singular perspective from the Supreme Court’s newest member, along with complaints from Justice Samuel Alito about the incomprehensibility of the Civil Service Reform Act, highlighted Monday’s argument in Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board.
Argument analysis: Intervention, standing and control over litigation
All sides faced sharp questioning from many corners of the Supreme Court on Monday in Town of Chester v. Laroe Estates on the question of whether intervenors as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 must have Article III standing.