Showing 1–50 of 74 items published in October 2015, most recent first.
Next Tuesday’s argument in Lockhart v. United States promises to be a prime-time event for statutory interpretation geeks. Indeed, one could tout this as “The Battle of the Canons” – the exchange of volleys between two venerable canons of statutory construction.
The process of selecting juries to try criminal cases has become, at least in high-profile cases, a science of human profiling. Both sides — prosecutors and defense lawyers — try to make educated guesses about how potential jurors may react if seated, at times using behavioral experts to improve the guessing.
Today the Justices meet for their October 30 Conference. The petitions for review that they will consider include several challenges to the government’s accommodation for non-profits that object to providing their female employees with health insurance that includes access to birth control.
This afternoon the Court issued an initial group of orders from its October 30 Conference, adding one new case to its merits docket for the Term. The Justices had considered Voisine v. United States at two earlier Conferences before granting review today.
Instead of identifying an exhaustive list of every state and federal criminal offense for which a conviction renders a non-citizen subject to removal (or ineligible for relief from removal), Congress has historically identified categories of convictions that will trigger removability and left it to
The November sitting begins next Monday, November 2. In the ABA Journal, Mark Walsh previews the second case that day: Spokeo v. Robins, in which the Court will consider whether a Virginia man can maintain his lawsuit against the Internet database that, he alleges, published inaccurate information about him in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
October was an active month for both the current and retired Justices. On October 6, retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor made an appearance with her brother at the Arizona Opera Book Club to share stories about their childhood and promote the memoir that they co-wrote, Lazy B: Growing Up on a Cattle Ranch in the American Southwest.
Briefly: In The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Marcia Coyle reports on recent comments by Justice Anthony Kennedy at Harvard Law School, noting that the Justice “may have revealed a source of his concern and dislike of solitary confinement.” At Constitution Daily,
Montanile v Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan presents a fact situation so pedestrian it is remarkable that the answer could be unclear: when someone with health insurance is injured in an automobile accident, does he have to reimburse the insurer for medical expenses covered by the plan if he later recovers from the other driver?
Briefly: NPR‘s Nina Totenberg reports on the upcoming release of Notorious RBG, “a highly illustrated nonfiction book about the iconic rise of” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, “who she is, how she got to the Supreme Court, and why young women want to be like her.” In The Washington Post, Robert Barnes
With the November sitting still a week away, the Justices are traveling outside Washington, D.C. Justice Sonia Sotomayor visited Pomona College in California; the college summarized her visit, with video available via YouTube.
On Friday the Court sat for its October 30 Conference. The November sitting will begin on Monday, November 2.
In its Conference of October 30, 2015, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as whether the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive-coverage mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, what type of analysis governs the extraterritorial application of the Fourth
Suspense at the Supreme Court often turns on whether the Justices will agree to hear a case and tackle a particular issue. But on rare occasions, the focus is on which case the Justices will hear, rather than whether they will hear one at all.
Briefly: Congratulations to our own Lyle Denniston, who will be inducted into the Nebraska Press Association’s Hall of Fame today!
John Elwood (briefly) reviews Monday’s relisted cases. It must be Relist Watch Week because all anybody has been able to talk about all week is predictions that didn’t pan out. The Court celebrated by releasing the order list Monday and then promptly taking the rest of the week off.
Commentary on last week’s oral arguments in Hurst v. Florida, in which the Court is considering the constitutionality of the state’s death-penalty sentencing scheme, continues.
Briefly: Writing for the blog of the National Conference of State Legislatures, Lisa Soronen discusses the State and Local Legal Center’s amicus brief in Luis v. United States, which “argues that if someone has spent or hidden their ill-gotten gain but has additional assets untainted by their
Yesterday the Court issued orders from its October 16 Conference, adding four new cases (two pairs that were consolidated for a total of two hours of oral arguments) to its merits docket.
Looking back at the early nineteenth century through today’s lens, which generally conceives of justice in terms of individual rights, many Americans – particularly slaves and married women – were largely invisible from a legal perspective, lacking any real recourse to federal and state law.
There is still more coverage of and commentary on the class-action case Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez.
The Supreme Court, already pondering a case on how the federal and state governments divide up authority over the price of electricity, agreed on Monday to take up a second version of that question.
Congress created the three-judge district court in 1910; the procedure directly responded to the Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Young, which allowed a federal district court, presided over by a single judge, to enjoin enforcement of an unconstitutional state law.
The Court issued orders from its October 16 Conference on Monday, adding two new pairs of cases to its merits docket for this Term. The November sitting will begin on Monday, November 2.
In its Conference of October 16, 2015, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as whether the Freedom of Information Act shields documents and discussions about an agency’s public justification for prior decisions, whether a misdemeanor crime with the mens rea of
Coverage of and commentary on Wednesday’s oral arguments in the class-action case Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez continue. Ronald Mann covered the oral argument for this blog, with other coverage coming from Cristian Farias of The Huffington Post, and commentary from Justin Sadowsky at Dubitante.
John Elwood reviews Tuesday’s relisted cases. These are tough times for those of us in the media business.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer will continue to take part in the Supreme Court’s review of a major energy policy case even though, when the Justices heard oral arguments in the case on Wednesday, his wife owned stock in a company that owns a firm directly involved in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Electric Power Supply Association.
Oyez has posted audio and transcripts from this week’s oral arguments. The Court heard argument this week in: Montgomery v. Louisiana Hurst v. Florida FERC v. Electric Power Supply Association Campbell-Ewald Company v. Gomez
The Court finished up its October sitting yesterday, beginning with oral arguments in the class-action case Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez. Coverage of the oral argument comes from Tony Mauro for the Supreme Court Brief (subscription required), with commentary from Daniel Fisher of Forbes.
SPOILER ALERT: If you’re reading this post to find out what the Justices and counsel had to say about the “derivative sovereign immunity” question Wednesday in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez (the second of two questions on which the Court granted review), you should stop now.
Yesterday’s oral argument in Montgomery v. Louisiana, in which the Court is considering whether its 2012 ruling in Miller v. Alabama applies retroactively to cases that were already final when Miller was decided, dominated coverage of and commentary on the Court.
Analysis Three high-performing appeals lawyers lined up to make high-quality arguments in the Supreme Court on Wednesday, but it may be very significant that the second chair from the right on the bench was empty.
Today’s transcript in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez is here; today’s transcript in FERC v. Electric Power Supply Assn. is here.
The Justices return today for the second week of the October sitting.
Analysis If the Supreme Court agrees twice to rule on an issue, the fair assumption is that it actually intends to decide it. But it has once been frustrated in an attempt to clarify the sentencing of juveniles who commit murder, and it may well have set the stage itself for missing a new chance.
The transcript in Montgomery v. Louisiana is here; the transcript in Hurst v. Florida is here.
Analysis In the nearly four decades since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty as constitutional, the Justices and lower courts have created an unusually complex, interwoven set of legal processes for capital cases.
UPDATED Friday 4:28 p.m. The McDonnell v. United States petition has now been docketed as 15-474. ———– Arguing that the federal prosecution of former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell was unique in the annals of public corruption cases, his attorneys on Tuesday afternoon asked the Supreme Court to overturn his conviction and his two-year prison sentence.
Analysis At least since Adam Smith was writing economic tracts in the late 1700s, it has been widely accepted that when consumers demand more of a product, either someone will produce more or prices will go up. That’s one of the theories of the “law” of supply and demand.
The Court issued orders from its October 9 Conference on Tuesday, without adding any new cases to its merits docket for this Term. The Court also heard oral arguments on Tuesday and Wednesday.
Analysis For years, the Supreme Court has been engaged in an energetic effort to enhance the role of the jury in criminal courts. No part of that has been more actively pursued than deepening the jury’s involvement in sentencing — a part of the process long dominated by trial judges.
Analysis June 25, 2012, has stood as a barrier to potential freedom for hundreds of youths who were sentenced before then to life in prison, without a chance of release, for murders they had committed.
Coverage of and commentary on Wednesday’s oral arguments in the Kansas death penalty cases continues.
The Supreme Court on Friday released the calendar of oral arguments for the December sitting, which begins on Monday, November 30. Three high-profile cases will be among those scheduled: the affirmative action case from the University of Texas, and two cases on the “one person, one vote” issue.
Oyez has posted audio and transcripts from this week’s oral arguments. The Court heard argument this week in: OBB Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs Hawkins v. Community Bank of Raymore Ocasio v. United States DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia Kansas v. Gleason Kansas v. Carr
John Elwood reviews this week’s relisted cases. Welcome back to another season of Relist Watch!
Yesterday the Justices heard oral arguments in three Kansas death-penalty cases.
The Justices closed out last Term with a high-profile death penalty case, holding that Oklahoma’s lethal injection procedures do not violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Yesterday the Court heard oral argument in two cases: Ocasio v. United States, in which it is considering whether a conspiracy to commit extortion requires the conspirators to agree to obtain property from someone outside the conspiracy, and the arbitration case DIRECTV v. Imburgia.