Academic round-up
The reliability of eyewitness identification has been the subject of thousands of academic articles, and will now be taken up again by the Court in Perry v. New Hampshire.
September 2011 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 80 items published in September 2011, most recent first.
Argument preview: Pacific Operators Offshore LLP v. Valladolid
Pacific Operators Offshore LLP v. Valladolid is a tricky case of statutory construction that will be argued at the Court on October 11, 2011. At issue are the coverage provisions for workers’ compensation benefits under one of many overlapping schemes that are dedicated to that issue.
The SCOTUSblog Community
On Monday, we will launch the new SCOTUSblog Community. The Community is essentially a discussion board. I will pick a new topic each business day. Each topic will presumptively remain open for one week. We at the blog will contribute our own opening thoughts.
Argument preview: When are Miranda warnings required to question a prisoner?
On October 4, in Howes v. Fields, the Court will consider whether a prisoner is always “in custody” for purposes of Miranda v. Arizona whenever he is isolated from the general prison population.
Friday round-up
More coverage and analysis of health care filings at the Court; previews of the upcoming Term and its cases.
Argument preview: Faith, teaching, and the Constitution
At 10 a.m. Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on a major test case on anti-discrimination laws and how far they may go to protect parochial school teachers from workplace bias.
Argument preview: Standing to challenge sex offender rule
The federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, or SORNA, has been percolating in the lower courts since its enactment in 2006. Convicted sex offenders seem to have attacked its registration requirements every which way, leaving a trail of lower court opinions that address everything from congressional authority to enact SORNA to the Tenth Amendment and related federalism concerns.
Argument preview: Challenging Medicaid cuts
The Supreme Court will begin hearing cases in its public session next Monday, the opening day of the new Term. The first case, starting at 10 a.m., grows out of challenges by health care providers in California to the state’s several moves to cut reimbursements for providing medical care for the poor and the disabled.
Thursday round-up
Yesterday’s health-care-related filings were the big news at the Court. The federal government filed a petition for certiorari seeking review of the Eleventh Circuit’s decision holding the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate unconstitutional, as well as a response to the petition for certiorari seeking review of the Sixth Circuit’s decision rejecting a facial challenge to the individual mandate.
Martinez v. Ryan argument preview: Direct vs. collateral review and the theory behind the right to counsel
The following Argument Preview is written by Stephen I. Vladeck, Professor of Law at American University Washington College of Law. His teaching and research focus on federal jurisdiction, constitutional law (especially the separation of powers), national security law, and international criminal law.
Broad challenges to health law (FURTHER UPDATED)
FURTHER UPDATE 3:30 p.m. The Justice Department has announced that it will be filing later Wednesday afternoon its own petition challenging the Eleventh Circuit decision. The blog will discuss that in a separate post, after it is filed. ————————— UPDATE 12;25 p.m.
Wednesday round-up
Yesterday the Court issued its first order list from Monday’s “Long Conference,” granting certiorari in eight cases, two of which have been consolidated for one hour of oral argument.
UC Hastings Term preview
At 3:30 p.m. today, UC Hastings will host a discussion to review the October Term 2010 and preview the October Term 2011. Panelists will include Justice Goodwin Liu of the California Supreme Court, Judge Marsha Berzon of the Ninth Circuit, and Professor Osagie Obasogie; Rory Little of UC Hastings will serve as the moderator.
U.S. appeals on health care (UPDATED)
UPDATE 6:55 p.m. The Obama Administration urged the Supreme Court Wednesday evening not to grant review of the Sixth Circuit Court ruling upholding the health insurance mandate, arguing that the issues can be fully explored in the government’s own case filed earlier in the day.
Tuesday round-up
With the start of the Term less than a week away, coverage centered on what will come before the Court – and when.
New cases taken — and not
Picking very selectively among hundreds of new cases brought to it since its last Term, the Supreme Court on Tuesday granted review of seven cases mainly of interest to lawyers in highly specialized fields, and left untouched — but perhaps only for the time being — some major new controversies of wide public interest.
On skipping the en banc Eleventh Circuit
There is a lot of speculation (for example, see here and here and here) surrounding the Obama Administration’s decision not to seek en banc review of the Eleventh Circuit’s panel ruling invalidating the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act.
Term preview at the National Constitution Center
On Thursday, September 29, at 6:30 p.m., the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia will host a preview of the upcoming Term. The event will feature SCOTUSblog reporter Lyle Denniston and John Payton, the President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund.
SCOTUS for law students: Health-care litigation
As law students around the country settle in for the new semester, there is no hotter legal question than the fate of the health care law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as the Affordable Care Act or ACA.
Welcome to the new SCOTUSblog
Welcome to the newest version of SCOTUSblog. This introductory post describes the changes we’ve made, including features we’re adding. We look forward to your feedback. Most significant is our new relationship with Bloomberg Law, which is now our exclusive sponsor.
Monday round-up
Continued coverage of the Affordable Care Act; Troy Davis and the Court; Justice Scalia on moral judgment; Robert Barnes on Justice Kagan’s first year
Heritage Foundation to host Term preview
At noon on Wednesday, September 28, the Heritage Foundation will host a preview of the Court’s upcoming Term. Paul Clement and Kannon Shanmugam will speak at the event, which can also be viewed via webcast. More information is available on the Heritage Foundation website.
Key health case moves on faster track
The Obama Administration, opting not to try to slow down the pace of a major case on the constitutionality of the new health care law, passed up a chance Monday to get the Eleventh Circuit Court to reconsider its decision August 12 nullifying the law’s most crucial provision.
Closing thoughts on the arbitration symposium
It seems especially notable that despite the broad range of backgrounds of the contributors to this symposium, not a single author has even attempted to defend the reasoning or holding of Concepcion. The implications of that are both profound and troubling.
This week at the Court
Significant dates in the weeks ahead.
AT&T Mobility and the end of consumer class action through Commerce Clause jurisprudence: Not so fast
Terry Moritz, a senior partner at Goldberg Kohn Ltd. considers AT&T v. Concepcion for our on-line arbitration symposium. View the whole symposium here.
Friday round-up
Justice Scalia celebrates twenty-five years on the Court; more on the Troy Davis execution; the Court declines to stay an Alabama execution; FISA ruling could be headed to the Court.
Thursday round-up
The Court denies Troy Davis’s plea for a stay of execution; the Justices in the news; arguments for and against granting cert. in Thomas More Law Center v. Obama.
Call for contributors
A call for outside experts to consider contributing to SCOTUSblog
A second, more circumstantial separability doctrine
Thomas Carbonneau of Penn State School of Law argues that Rent-A-Center v. Jackson demonstrates the dangers of bootstrapping the articulation of doctrine.
Wednesday round-up
Another stay of execution in Texas; and Justice Sotomayor on HBO
The third arbitration trilogy: Revelation, reaction and reflection on the direction of American arbitration
Thomas Stipanowich of Pepperdine University School of Law considers themes in the Court’s recent arbitration decisions as well as Congress’s response to those decisions and offers suggestions for alternative process models.
Is the Supreme Court demanding enough as it provides incentives for the private funding of a federal small claims court?
Professor Welsh argues that the Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion should be understood as its answer to a Congress that continues to funnel more cases to the federal courts while simultaneously underfunding and understaffing them. The Court is effectively providing an incentive for the private funding of a layer of judicial adjuncts to handle frequently occurring bilateral disputes between disparate parties, but it is doing so without clearly demanding structural safeguards to assure that bilateral arbitration is sufficiently attractive and fair.
FURTHER UPDATE: Troy Davis executed
Attorneys for death row inmate Troy Anthony Davis, in the latest of a series of attempts to spare his life, filed a new plea on Wednesday, shortly before he was due to be put to death. UPDATE: The Court refused a delay shortly after 10 p.m., and Davis was executed about an hour later.
Military ban on gays ends (UPDATED)
The repeal of the military’s “don’t ask/don’t tell” policy, in effect since 1993, came to an end Tuesday as the Pentagon put into effect a repeal enacted by Congress.
Tuesday round-up
Considering capital punishment; Citizens United; and Kelo v. City of New London
The uncertain future of the manifest disregard doctrine
The Supreme Court’s decision in Hall Street Associates v. Mattel, Inc., left open the question whether courts can vacate an arbitral award because of the arbitrator’s “manifest disregard” of the law. John Elwood examines the unsettled state of the law in the wake of that decision.
Rent-A-Center v. Jackson: Delegating to arbitrator power to determine arbitrability
Steven Bennett examines Rent-A-Center v. Jackson and the severability rule, concluding that the full implications of the decision are yet to be determined.
Eliminating class actions – a tsunami in the wake of AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion threatens access to justice
Jean Sternlight of the University of Nevada-Las Vegas Boyd School of Law examines the lower courts’ decisions after Concepcion and concludes that most courts’ broad interpretations of the Court’s decision will lead to the demise of consumer and employment class actions and thereby allow companies to elude regulation.
Monday round-up
Justice Breyer becomes Pritzker judge, Justice O’Connor speaks at Constitution Day, discussion of Fourth Amendment GPS tracking case, U.S. v. Jones.
Class actions in the wake of Concepcion
Michael Rubin of Altshuler Berzon argues that although the decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion has eliminated the most common ground for challenging class action prohibitions – state unconscionability law – nothing in the decision precludes plaintiffs from bringing new challenges resting on other statutory theories.
Prop. 8 trial could be broadcast soon
A federal judge in California orders the release of the videotaped recording of the 2010 federal court trial on the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage. The order, though, was delayed briefly to allow an appeal.
UPDATED: New test of college affirmative action
A new appeal in a closely watched case on race-based affirmative action at the University of Texas reaches the Court, testing the scope of the Court’s most recent ruling on the issue.
Friday round-up
The Court halts an execution in Texas; the Justices speak out on the death penalty, the role of the Court, and recent decisions.
Some costs of flaunting but flunking Contracts
Lawrence Cunningham of George Washington University School of Law argues that the Court’s exuberant contract rhetoric in arbitration opinions poses hidden costs.
Do-it-yourself tort reform: How the Supreme Court quietly killed the class action
David Schwartz argues that the implications of the Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion are staggering, and he suggests that getting upset about the Court’s decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes would be like flipping out over a brief thundershower a few weeks after having slept through Hurricane Irene.
Academic round-up
Legal scholars write about, and litigate, questions regarding the separation of church and state that are now before the Court in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC.
Thursday round-up
Justice Ginsburg’s flight is evacuated; Justice Breyer speaks in California and joins the Pritzker Prize jury; and Katyal on American Electric Power v. Connecticut.
AT&T Mobility, FAA preemption and class arbitration
Jill Gross of Pace Law School analyzes the Court’s decision last term in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion in the broader context of Federal Arbitration Act preemption jurisprudence and class arbitration.
12