Tuesday round-up
We have changed our round-up format! In an effort to simplify the process for our round-up team, going forward we will only include in the round-up news articles and posts that are submitted to us.
April 2013 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 104 items published in April 2013, most recent first.
The Court “DIGs” in Boyer v. Louisiana – and sometimes silence can speak volumes.
One might joke that Monday’s order in Boyer v. Louisiana, dismissing the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted (“DIG”), was issued to eliminate all traces of Justice Thomas’s single recorded oral argument remark in seven years (as noted in my summary of the oral argument).
New pledge on Guantanamo
With a mass-protest hunger strike apparently still spreading among detainees at Guantanamo Bay, President Obama on Tuesday promised to make a new effort to persuade Congress to allow the closing of the prison run by the U.S. military on the island of Cuba.
Monday round-up
If you have a story or post that you think should be included in the round-up, please send a link to roundup [at] scotusblog.com so that we can consider it. As Lyle reported for this blog, on Saturday morning Justice Stephen Breyer broke his right shoulder after an accident on his bicycle.
Details on today’s opinions
In McBurney v. Young, a unanimous Court (in an opinion by Justice Alito) held that Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act, which grants Virginia citizens access to all public records, but grants no such right to non-Virginians, does not violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause, which protects
Opinion recap: Only one argument needed
Analysis Virginia went to the Supreme Court with one argument, and only one, for its policy of limiting access to state public records to people who live in Virginia. That did not seem to work well at the argument in February, but that is not the test that counts.
Court to rule on deadly drugs
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether prosecutors must prove that the use of heroin directly caused someone to die, in order to get a longer prison sentence for the person convicted of selling the drug.
This week at the Court
On Monday the Court granted one new case, Burrage v. United States, and issued two opinions in argued cases. The next Conference is scheduled for May 9. Our list of “Petitions to watch” for that Conference will be available soon.
Justice Breyer injured in fall
Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer, 74, broke his right shoulder Saturday morning in a fall from his bicycle in downtown Washington, the Court said in a news release.
Friday round-up
On Thursday, the Obama administration filed a petition for certiorari asking the Supreme Court to overturn a decision by the D.C. Circuit holding that three of President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board are unconstitutional.
This week’s oral arguments
The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent has posted synchronized audio and transcripts for the final week of scheduled oral arguments for the Term. The Court heard arguments this week in: Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society Hillman v. Maretta Tarrant Regional Water District v. Herrmann Sekhar v. United States Metrish v. Lancaster University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar
Thursday round-up
Yesterday the Court heard the final two oral arguments scheduled for this Term. In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the Court is considering what standard of proof should apply to retaliation claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Argument recap: Close call on Title VII retaliation case
Yesterday the Court heard oral argument in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar.
Argument analysis: Do Texans like salty water?
Tuesday’s oral argument in Tarrant Water District v. Herrmann was another reunion of the Solicitor General’s Office. Counsel for the petitioner Texas water district, Charles Rothfeld, is an alum of the SG’s office, as is Lisa Blatt, counsel for the Oklahoma Water Resources Board.
Recess appointments defended
The Obama administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to restore the President’s power to fill vacancies in government posts when the Senate is out of town. The petition argued that the D.C. Circuit Court got it wrong in January in sharply curtailing that authority.
Argument preview: Taking away a defense to crime
At 10 a.m. tomorrow, on the final scheduled day of oral argument in this Term, the Supreme Court will hold a one-hour hearing on when it is unconstitutional for government to abolish a legal defense to a criminal charge.
SCOTUSblog is hiring
SCOTUSblog is now accepting applications from current law students interested in joining our round-up team. Details about the position’s qualifications and responsibilities, as well as how to apply, are below the jump.
Wednesday round-up
Yesterday’s coverage largely focused on the two cases in which the Court heard oral argument and the lone opinion that it issued. Yesterday the Court issued its opinion in Moncrieffe v. Holder.
Argument recap: Who makes law?
Analysis A close student of the criminal law who did not sit in on Wednesday’s Supreme Court argument in a Michigan murder case missed a fascinating — and far from conclusive — seminar on who makes criminal law: courts that rule, legislatures that write laws, lawyers who try to assert defenses, prosecutors who don’t object to such defenses, or a force that might be called “The Great Mentioner”?
Today’s transcripts
The transcript in Metrish v. Lancaster is here. The transcript in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar is here.
Argument recap: Looking for the less wrong answer
At today’s argument in Hillman v. Maretta, the Justices disagreed with both sides’ readings of the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Act (FEGLIA).
Tuesday round-up
Today the Court will hear oral arguments in two cases. In Sekhar v. United States, the Court will consider whether a lawyer’s legal advice can be treated as property that is the subject of an extortion attempt under the Hobbs Act. Lyle Denniston previews the case for this blog.
Deadline reporting prize
We’re very honored to receive the Society of Professional Journalists (Sigma Delta Chi) prize for deadline reporting for our coverage of the Supreme Court’s healthcare ruling last term.
Argument recap: Killing an argument in one easy blow
Analysis Sometimes the Supreme Court Justices can strain throughout an argument to imagine a hypothetical that gets to the heart of the case, and never quite come up with one — although the current Court’s imagination is rich with such scenarios.
Congress’s war crimes power at issue
After pondering the issue for more than a month, the D.C. Circuit Court voted on Tuesday to review anew Congress’s power to create new war crimes that apply to alleged terrorist acts that occurred even before those laws were enacted.
Today’s transcripts
The transcript in Sekhar v. United States is here. The transcript in Tarrant Regional Water District v. Herrmann is here.
Relist watch
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. Despite having had nothing particularly profound or of any human interest to dwell on over the past week, the Court did not make much progress clearing out the familiar relists.
Opinion recap: Easing a severe drug law
If a non-citizen living legally in the U.S. gets convicted in state court for “social sharing of a small amount of marijuana,” the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday, that individual should not be subject to automatic deportation, with no chance to stay in the U.S. or no chance to return if once sent away.
Argument preview: Proving retaliation under Title VII
On Wednesday, the Court will hear oral argument in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, No. 12-484. The case asks the Court to decide which of three standards of proof apply to retaliation claims under Title VII.
Monday round-up
The weekend’s clippings highlight this week’s oral arguments and last week’s decisions. Today, the Court will hear arguments in both Hillman v. Maretta and U.S. Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society, International.
New case on foreign corporations (FINAL UPDATE)
FINAL UPDATE 2:55 pm. This post has been updated to suggest the potentially wider impact of the newly granted case, and the Court’s possible reasons for accepting it. —————- The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take on another dispute over lawsuits in American courts against foreign companies, just days after coming close to barring such cases under the Alien Tort Statute.
Argument recap: Anxiously seeking simplicity
Analysis No matter how two lawyers tried to simplify their arguments before the Supreme Court on Monday, the Justices often acted as if there just had to be a way to reduce them down even more.
Today’s transcripts
The transcript in Hillman v. Maretta is here. The transcript in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. is here.
Argument preview: Legal advice as property
At 10 a.m. tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on the novel issue of whether a lawyer’s legal advice can be treated as a kind of property that can be taken by extortion.
This week at the Court
This was the second week of the April sitting and the last week in which the Justices are scheduled to hear arguments until the 2013 Term begins in October. On Monday the Court granted one new case. Lyle’s report on the orders is here. On Tuesday the Court issued one opinion, Moncrieffe v. Holder.
Petitions to watch | Conference of April 26, 2013
At its April 26, 2013 Conference, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as antitrust liability for conditional-rebate agreements, equitable mootness in bankruptcy appeals, and the scope of a custodial suspect’s invocation of Miranda rights.
Argument preview: Divorce, death, and preemption
At Monday’s oral argument in Hillman v. Maretta, the Justices will consider whether federal law preempts state laws permitting the widow or widower of a deceased federal employee to sue that employee’s former spouse to recover life insurance proceeds.
Argument preview: He who pays the piper…
At 11 a.m. on Monday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on the scope of Congress’s power to attach limits on the message put out by those who get paid by the government for taking part in a program. The hearing time will be split evenly.
Friday round-up
We are switching to a new system of collecting links for the round-up. If you have a story or post related to the Supreme Court that you would like us to include in the round-up, please send a link to [email protected] so that we can consider it.
Opinion analysis: If the agreement governs, the agreement governs
On Tuesday, the Court issued a split decision in U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen, handing a partial victory to each side.
Commentary: Why the Court unanimously jettisoned thirty years of lower court precedent (and what that can tell us about how to read Kiobel)
SCOTUSblog is pleased to have reactions from supporters of both sides to this week’s decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum. This post is written by Meir Feder of Jones Day.
Argument preview: A Texas border water war
On Tuesday in Tarrant Regional Water District v. Herrmann, the Court will consider whether thirsty residents in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas can tap into water resources located in Oklahoma in order to slake their growing need for water.
This week’s oral arguments
The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent has posted audio and synchronized transcripts for this week’s oral arguments. The Court heard arguments this week in: United States v. Davila Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl American Trucking Associations v. City of Los Angeles Salinas v. Texas United States v. Kebodeaux
Petitions to watch | Conference of April 19, 2013
At its April 19, 2013 Conference, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as Section 1983 claims by Medicaid beneficiaries, possible preemption of state immigration law, the constitutionality of disallowing judicial salary increases, and term-of-year sentencing for juveniles.
Thursday round-up
Yesterday the Court released its opinion in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, holding that the Alien Tort Statute does not apply to conduct that took place overseas.
Commentary: What’s left of the Alien Tort Statute?
SCOTUSblog is pleased to have reactions from supporters of both sides to yesterday’s decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum. This post is written by Anton Metlitsky, who is counsel to Rio Tinto, which filed an amicus brief in support of the respondents in this case.
Kiobel commentary: Answers … and more questions
SCOTUSblog is pleased to have reactions from supporters of both sides to yesterday’s decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum. This post is written by Kristin Myles and James Rutten, who served as counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in this case.
Press credential
We’re very pleased to say that the Senate Press Gallery has granted our reporter Lyle Denniston a press credential as a representative of SCOTUSblog. The Supreme Court’s general practice, which we expect to apply in this case, is to recognize Senate credentials.
Welcome, Art Lien!
I’m very pleased to say that the blog will now be including work by veteran Supreme Court sketch artist Art Lien. Art’s principal work is for NBC, to which he has contributed fantastic pieces since 1980.
Argument review: Looking for limits on congressional authority
Any time the Court considers a question of congressional authority, it will be concerned about limits. That’s because the Constitution grants Congress only certain enumerated powers, and the Court worries that any particular exercise of congressional authority could be a step down a slippery slope to a generalized federal police power.