Showing 1–50 of 109 items published in October 2013, most recent first.
In her column for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse uses recent comments by Judge Richard Posner about his decision upholding Indiana’s voter identification law (which the Court, in an opinion by now-retired Justice John Paul Stevens, affirmed) as a jumping-off point to discuss how judges –
The Court ventures once again into the class-action debate next month, when it hears arguments in Mississippi v. AU Optronics Corp. This time, the Justices confront the Class Action Fairness Act of 2001 (the “CAFA”), which allows defendants to remove to federal court large class actions filed in state court.
In response to a request from the Supreme Court, yesterday the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that a 2011 state law regulating medical abortions is sufficiently broad in scope that it would “effectively ban[]” all medical abortions in the state.
Geoffrey Rapp is the Harold A. Anderson Professor of Law and Values at University of Toledo College of Law Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) enacted a protective scheme for workers terminated for blowing the whistle on corporate and securities fraud.
William Baude will be the Neubauer Family Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Chicago beginning next year. During its October sitting, the Court heard oral arguments in cases involving venue and personal jurisdiction.
At its November 1, 2013 Conference, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as the standing of an objecting class member to challenge a class-certification order, determining qualified immunity based on law at the time of the alleged wrong, and whether a suspect who expresses his desire to go home unequivocally and unambiguously invokes his Miranda rights.
Yesterday the National Portrait Gallery unveiled a new life-sized portrait of the four female Justices. Tony Mauro reports on the event, which included remarks by artist Nelson Shanks, for the Blog of Legal Times.
The Federal Circuit may be in for another hard day at the Court when the Justices hear argument next week in Medtronic v. Boston Scientific Corp. At issue in the case is who bears the burden of persuasion when a user of technology files suit against a patent-holder, seeking a declaratory judgment that its actions do not infringe a particular patent.
The importance of the health care case and being the forty-sixth Solicitor General of the United States.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled today that a 2011 state law — now awaiting review by the Supreme Court — is so broad that it would outlaw all abortions done with medications, rather than surgery.
You can now get email updates on this Term’s Supreme Court merits cases when something significant happens, such as the filing of an important brief or the decision being issued. The option to subscribe is now at the top of each of those case pages.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday spelled out new, tighter limits on the written briefs that may be filed for the Court’s review of government regulations of so-called greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other fixed sources. The briefing order is here.
Over the last few years, Adam Liptak of The New York Times has questioned the value of amicus briefs by law professors and legal scholarship generally.
Coverage of the Court focused on Friday’s panel on transparency (or the perceived absence thereof) at the Court. At the Blog of Legal Times, Matthew Huisman reports on the panel, which the BLT’s Tony Mauro moderated; Robert Barnes of The Washington Post discusses the panel and the issue of transparency more broadly.
Scott Dodson is a Professor of Law at University of California Hastings College of the Law.
A privacy advocacy group, seeking to keep alive in the Supreme Court its challenge to the federal government’s secret sweeps of electronic and digital communication data, argued on Monday that the privacy of “every person in this country” is at stake in the case.
We do not expect any non-capital orders or opinions this week. On Friday, the Justices will meet for their November 1 Conference; our list of “Petitions to watch” for that Conference is here. The Court will next hear oral arguments on November 4, the first day of the November sitting.
Last Wednesday evening, Justice Kagan hosted the Supreme Court Historical Society for the third of its four 2013 Leon Silverman lectures, whose theme this year is “Litigants in landmark Supreme Court cases of the 20th century.” The lecture, by Harvard Law School’s Kenneth Mack, focused on recently retired Chief Judge Robert Bell, the lead plaintiff in Bell v. Maryland, who was also in attendance.
At The Atlantic, Andrew Cohen discusses this week’s grant in Hall v. Florida, in which the Court will consider the constitutionality of Florida’s scheme for identifying defendants who are intellectually disabled and therefore cannot be executed. “[D]epending upon how the justices vote,” he
With the advent of a new Term, it is time to return to thinking about the business of the Supreme Court, past, present and to come. In that regard, the line-up of seventeen new or forthcoming books should be of considerable interest to SCOTUSblog readers.
Asserting that the future of broadcast television is seriously at risk, networks, stations, and programming companies have asked the Supreme Court to give them broad copyright protection against the streaming of their programs on the Internet by an outsider, with no payments to them.
In response to a request from the Court, the parties in the greenhouse gases cases have agreed to reduce both the length and number of their briefs on the merits.
Preparing Supreme Court cases and what makes a Solicitor General.
In a wave of new laws enacted across the country, foes of abortion are pushing a common goal: to ban the termination of pregnancy at earlier stages than the Supreme Court has previously allowed.
The Office of the Solicitor General as a Supreme Court gatekeeper.
Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, in which the Court is considering the constitutionality of Michigan’s ban on the use of affirmative action by public universities, continues to garner commentary.
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. There are those who say the Supreme Court involves itself in too much of American life. But when you see how well the other branches are doing, you begin to understand why.
The responsibility to advocate the “interests of the United States.” In this five-part interview, Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., the forty-sixth Solicitor General of the United States, discusses his background, the office and job of Solicitor General, its special relation to the Court, and representing
Taking a major Supreme Court ruling a big step further, the Third Circuit Court in Philadelphia ruled Tuesday that police and federal agents must get a warrant in order to put a GPS tracking device on a car or truck to monitor the travels of a suspect they are investigating.
Yesterday the Court granted two new cases: Hall v. Florida, a case involving Florida’s scheme for identifying intellectually disabled defendants in capital cases, and Robers v. United States, a case involving restitution as a penalty for bank loan fraud.
The controversy over recent remarks by Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit, who indicates in his new book that he now believes that his 2007 opinion upholding an Indiana voter ID law (which was subsequently affirmed by the Court) was wrong, continues.
The Supreme Court moved on Monday to settle a long-lingering issue: the legal standard for judging whether a person is mentally disabled, and therefore eligible for the death penalty. That is the issue the Court granted in Hall v. Florida (docket 12-10882), to be argued early in the new year.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, convinced that the state’s challenge to same-sex marriages would fail in the state supreme court, on Monday had his legal staff withdraw an appeal on the issue. The state’s formal withdrawal letter is here; a statement from the governor’s office is here.
Law school, being confirmed as Solicitor General, and the position and role of the Office of Solicitor General in the federal government.
UPDATE 7:31 p.m. The Obama administration on Monday evening filed three documents in the Supreme Court responding to Affordable Care Act petitions.
On Monday the Court granted two new cases and called for the views of the Solicitor General in one case. Lyle’s post on the orders is here. The Justices’ next Conference is scheduled for November 1; our list of ‘Petitions to watch” for that Conference will be available soon.
The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent has posted audio and transcripts of this week’s arguments. The Court heard arguments this week in: Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co. Daimler AG v. Bauman Kaley v. United States Kansas v. Cheever
In his new book, Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit writes that his 2007 opinion upholding an Indiana voter ID law was wrong.
Clearing the way for same-sex couples to get married in New Jersey next week, the state supreme court on Friday refused to delay a judge’s order that will open marriage and all of its benefits to those couples. The unanimous opinion denying a plea by state officials for postponement is here.
Yesterday the Court heard oral arguments in two cases.
In Tuesday’s argument in Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co., the Justices seemed convinced that no matter how they decide this case, it probably won’t be a big deal.
The SCOTUSblog iOS app is now available in the App Store for free download. In addition to mobile access to the regular content on the blog, users will be able to receive push notifications pertaining to breaking news at the Supreme Court.
John Elwood reviews Tuesday’s relisted cases. As the heart of Washington comes back to life this morning, the Watch remains your constant companion in these tumultuous times. Never essential, but never furloughed either. First the old.
At its October 18, 2013 Conference, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as the standing of an objecting class member to challenge a class-certification order, determining qualified immunity based on law at the time of the alleged wrong, and the penalty for non-production of documents overseas.
The Obama administration, relying largely on procedural arguments, has urged the Supreme Court to pass up its first opportunity to rule on the legality of the government’s global electronic surveillance of telephone and digital contacts.
In late June, the Court ordered a lower court to take a tougher look at the University of Texas’s consideration of race as a factor in its admissions process, but it allowed the program to survive, at least for now.
Coverage of the Supreme Court’s docket tends to focus on the blockbusters, and this month is no exception: last week the Court heard oral argument in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, the challenge to the aggregate caps on campaign contributions, and today in Schuette v. Coalition to
Yesterday the Court heard oral argument in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, the challenge to an amendment to the Michigan constitution that bans the use of affirmative action by public universities. Lyle reported on the argument for this blog, while I added a Plain English recap.
Analysis Stepping into the ongoing national debate over global warming, the Supreme Court has opted to clarify how far the federal government may go with its power to limit the amount of so-called “greenhouse gases” that enter the nation’s atmosphere.
Back from a brief holiday break, the Supreme Court on Tuesday was busy not only with high-profile hearings, especially on the use of race in college admissions, but with a series of orders adding new issues to its docket, and turning aside others.