Monday round-up
As Lyle Denniston reported for this blog, last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld a federal law prohibiting protests and demonstrations on the Supreme Court’s plaza.
August 2015 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 59 items published in August 2015, most recent first.
Former governor to remain free during appeal
Raising the chance that the Supreme Court will review his case, former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell on Monday gained the right to stay out of prison while that appeal goes forward.
Final reminder: SCOTUSblog is hiring
The blog and Goldstein & Russell, P.C., are looking for someone to serve as both the firm manager for Goldstein & Russell, P.C., and the deputy manager of SCOTUSblog.
Same-sex marriage issue returns to the Court (FURTHER UPDATED)
UPDATED Saturday 7:49 a.m. Relying upon the history, dating back to America’s founding, of the right of conscience, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis asked the Supreme Court on Friday night to protect her from taking an official action that she regards as an indication that she supports same-sex marriage, an act that would violate her faith.
Court now can ban protests on its threshold
More than two years after a federal judge took away most of the Supreme Court’s power to prohibit all picketing, protests, and other demonstrations on the plaza in front of its building, a federal appeals court revived that authority on Friday in a lengthy opinion.
Symposium: Another battle in the war over union fees
Charlotte Garden is an Associate Professor at Seattle University School of Law and Litigation Director of the Korematsu Center for Law & Equality. Across America, an intense debate is taking place over how states should structure their labor relations, and especially the extent to which state and local government employees should have the right to elect unions to represent them in collective bargaining.
Friday round-up
Briefly: Anthony Franze and Reeves Anderson conducted their annual review of amicus practice at the Court for The National Law Journal; they conclude that it was another record-breaking year for amici, which has essentially become the “new norm.” In both The Hill and American Thinker, Sean Roman
Symposium: Correcting the “historical accident” of opt-out requirements
David B. Rivkin, Jr., and Andrew M. Grossman practice appellate litigation in the Washington, D.C., office of Baker & Hostetler LLP. They filed an amicus brief in support of certiorari in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association on behalf of the Cato Institute, where Mr. Grossman is an adjunct scholar.
Thursday round-up
As Lyle Denniston reported yesterday for this blog, Nebraska has filed a petition for rehearing en banc in the Eighth Circuit, asking the full court to declare a challenge to its ban on same-sex marriage moot and thereby “keep seven Nebraska couples from pursuing their case further and seeking to recover the money they spent for their lawyers’ fees.” Howard Wasserman weighs in on the rehearing request at PrawfsBlawg.
Symposium: The Friedrichs petition should be dismissed
Catherine Fisk is the Chancellor’s Professor of Law at the University of California, Irvine School of Law.
Wednesday round-up
Briefly: Jessica Gresko of the Associated Press reports that both same- and opposite-sex couples are using excerpts from Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, holding that states must allow same-sex couples to marry, in their wedding ceremonies.
Did Obergefell settle the same-sex marriage issue?
The state of Nebraska, arguing that the Supreme Court’s June ruling opening the right to marry to same-sex couples settled the issue nationwide, urged a federal appeals court on Tuesday to reopen that state’s case and keep seven Nebraska couples from pursuing their case further and seeking to recover the money they spent for their lawyers’ fees.
Symposium: Will the Court continue to recognize a distinction between bargaining with government and lobbying the government?
William Messenger is an attorney with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. He argued on behalf of the petitioners in Harris v. Quinn. The First Amendment generally forbids the government from forcing citizens to support a private organization’s speech and expressive activities.
Symposium: Public-sector unions, labor relations, and free speech
Ann C. Hodges is a Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law. As every first-year law student learns, the First Amendment is not absolute because the government can restrict speech with adequate justification.
Tuesday round-up
Yesterday the Chief Justice allowed former Virginia governor Bob McDonnell to stay out of prison, at least temporarily. The Court ordered the federal government to respond by Wednesday afternoon to McDonnell’s application to postpone his imprisonment while he pursues Supreme Court review.
Symposium: Overrule Abood to protect individual rights
Deborah J. La Fetra is a Principal Attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation. Since 1990, she has written dozens of amicus briefs and directly represented dissenters in challenges to state-compelled subsidization of politicking.
New challenge to public employee unions, made simple
Editor’s note: This post examines Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case the Supreme Court has agreed to review during its upcoming Term. The blog will be hosting a symposium on the case this week.
Monday round-up
Before the Justices began their summer recess at the end of June, they granted review in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, in which they will consider whether government employees who do not belong to a union can nonetheless be required to pay fees to support union activities related to collective bargaining.
Former governor spared prison, for now (UPDATED)
UPDATED Wednesday 6:01 p.m. The Justice Department urged the Supreme Court not to allow the former governor to remain free while he pursues his appeal. The Court, it argued, is not likely to grant review of the case, or to rule his way even if it did.
Court saves Mellouli’s fate for itself
Moones Mellouli, a Tunisian who had been living legally in the United States until he was deported for a minor drug crime, won one appeal to the Supreme Court this past June and on Friday moved into position potentially to win another.
SCOTUSblog on camera: Neal Katyal (Part five)
“Appellate advocacy, particularly at the Supreme Court, is really intimate. I mean, you’re just a few feet away from the Chief Justice. You know, if you’re sweating, they see you. And, it’s a conversation.
Ex-Gov. McDonnell in new plea to remain out of prison
Lawyers for former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell, arguing that he committed no crime but engaged only in “common political pleasantries” toward a man who supplied him with expensive gifts and favors, has asked the Supreme Court to keep him out of prison until he can appeal his political corruption conviction.
SCOTUSblog on camera: Neal Katyal (Part four)
“Appellate advocacy, particularly at the Supreme Court, is really intimate. I mean, you’re just a few feet away from the Chief Justice. You know, if you’re sweating, they see you. And, it’s a conversation.
Friday round-up
Briefly: Greenwire‘s Jeremy Jacobs reports that the Court’s recent ruling in Horne v. Department of Agriculture, striking down “an odd Depression-era raisin program[,] may have revived a critical government defense for endangered species and other wildlife protections, legal experts say.” At his
SCOTUSblog on camera: Neal Katyal (Part three)
“Appellate advocacy, particularly at the Supreme Court, is really intimate. I mean, you’re just a few feet away from the Chief Justice. You know, if you’re sweating, they see you. And, it’s a conversation.
Thursday round-up
In her column for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse looks at the Connecticut Supreme Court’s recent ruling abolishing the death penalty in that state; she argues that the court “not only produced an important ruling for its own jurisdiction” but also “addressed the United States Supreme Court
SCOTUSblog on camera: Neal Katyal (Part two)
“Appellate advocacy, particularly at the Supreme Court, is really intimate. I mean, you’re just a few feet away from the Chief Justice. You know, if you’re sweating, they see you. And, it’s a conversation.
Texas lost when it thought it had won. The cost: $1 million
The state of Texas, one of the most energetic opponents of a key part of the federal Voting Rights Act, has turned what it was sure was a Supreme Court victory against that law into a legal defeat that will cost it more than $1 million.
Wednesday round-up
Briefly: At Cato at Liberty, Andrew Grossman looks ahead to Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, in which the Court will hear oral arguments in the upcoming Term; he urges the Court to make clear “that trial by formula is off-limits, whether a case is brought as a class action or as a ‘collective action’
Tuesday round-up
Briefly: In USA Today, Tony Mauro observes that, with three Justices who will be over the age of eighty in January 2017, “[o]ne of the campaign issues that went underdiscussed during the first prime-time Republican presidential debate should really be at the top of the list: the future of the
SCOTUSblog on camera: Neal Katyal (Part one)
“Appellate advocacy, particularly at the Supreme Court, is really intimate. I mean, you’re just a few feet away from the Chief Justice. You know, if you’re sweating, they see you. And, it’s a conversation.
The “sock removal” case continues: Mellouli v. Lynch and compliance with the Court’s mandate
Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court provided Moones Mellouli, a lawful permanent resident who had been ordered removed from the United States, with a victory in his efforts to reverse a removal order.
Monday round-up
Briefly: In an op-ed for The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Rick Hasen suggests that a “special jurisdictional provision” in the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law “makes it much more likely that within the next few years the Supreme Court will strike limits on the
Virginia ex-governor’s corruption case on way to Court
One of the highest-profile political corruption cases in years will soon be on its way to the Supreme Court. Lawyers for former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell told a federal appeals court on Thursday that they will be taking his corruption case on to Washington and want him to be allowed to stay out of prison until the Justices act.
Friday round-up
At Balkinization, Marty Lederman notes that the federal government has filed its first brief opposing certiorari in the challenges by non-profit religious groups to the Affordable Care Act’s birth-control mandate.
SCOTUSblog on camera: Walter Dellinger (Part five)
“In many ways, if you want to know what moves the Court to decide cases, listen to oral argument, which is much more like the Supreme Court’s Id. Opinions are like the Supreme Court’s Super Ego.” Walter Dellinger is the Douglas B. Maggs Professor of Law at Duke University and a Partner in the Washington, DC, office of O’Melveny & Myers LLP, where he is a member of the Appellate Practice Group.
Thursday round-up
Briefly: At Fortune, Jeff John Roberts looks at the impact that the Court’s decision last Term in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC could have on start-ups, and in particular the prospect that the “end of antitrust immunity for state boards could help companies like Uber against
Wednesday round-up
Yesterday Lyle Denniston reported for this blog on a ruling by a federal district judge in Kansas declaring that state’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, in the wake of the Court’s decision earlier in this summer in Obergefell v. Hodges.
SCOTUSblog on camera: Walter Dellinger (Part four)
“In many ways, if you want to know what moves the Court to decide cases, listen to oral argument, which is much more like the Supreme Court’s Id. Opinions are like the Supreme Court’s Super Ego.” Walter Dellinger is the Douglas B. Maggs Professor of Law at Duke University and a Partner in the Washington, DC, office of O’Melveny & Myers LLP, where he is a member of the Appellate Practice Group.
Making same-sex marriage a reality: The final steps
Demonstrating that the Supreme Court may rule but may not always command, the process of making same-sex marriage available nationwide is still unfolding, some six weeks after the Justices decided in its favor.
Tuesday round-up
Commentary on the upcoming Term’s Evenwel v. Abbott, the “one person, one vote” case, continues.
SCOTUSblog on camera: Walter Dellinger (Part three)
“In many ways, if you want to know what moves the Court to decide cases, listen to oral argument, which is much more like the Supreme Court’s Id. Opinions are like the Supreme Court’s Super Ego.” Walter Dellinger is the Douglas B. Maggs Professor of Law at Duke University and a Partner in the Washington, DC, office of O’Melveny & Myers LLP, where he is a member of the Appellate Practice Group.
Monday round-up
Writing for this blog, Lyle Denniston reports that late last week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected a challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.
New or forthcoming books on the Supreme Court, including one by Justice Stephen Breyer
If you are a Supreme Court watcher, several new or forthcoming books will be of special interest to you. Coming next month will be a book (his ninth) by Justice Stephen Breyer.
Reminder: SCOTUSblog is hiring
The blog and Goldstein & Russell, P.C., are looking for someone to serve as both the firm manager for Goldstein & Russell, P.C., and the deputy manager of SCOTUSblog.
Health insurance mandate survives again
A new challenge to the federal mandate requiring most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty stirred up a major constitutional debate in a federal appeals court on Friday. However, in the end, all eleven judges — relying on sharply conflicting views — rejected the challenge.
Friday round-up
Writing for this blog, Lyle Denniston reports on a recent ruling by the Fifth Circuit striking down (in part) Texas’s voter ID law, observing that the case “or one of the others is likely to make its way to the Supreme Court.” Chris Kieser analyzes the case at the Pacific Legal Foundation’s Liberty
The 2015 Oxford Handbook of the U.S. Constitution
The following post is by Mark Graber, co-editor with Mark Tushnet and Sanford Levinson of the recently published Oxford Handbook of the United States Constitution. Efforts to provide comprehensive guides to the Constitution date from the framing and ratification of the Constitution.
SCOTUS for law students: Standing and the Constitution
First-year law students learn that the Constitution requires lawsuits in federal court to be based on claims of sufficient injury to establish standing to sue.
Thursday round-up
Briefly: In The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Tony Mauro reports on the Justices’ overseas summer travel, including a trip by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to South Korea.
12