Today at the Court
The Justices meet for their private conference today to consider cert. petitions and motions in pending cases. Our list of Petitions to Watch for that conference is here.
April 2010 Archive
Showing 1–50 of 169 items published in April 2010, most recent first.
Justice Stevens, Particularist
The following essay for our thirty-day series on John Paul Stevens is by Frederick Schauer, David and Mary Harrison Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia. Schauer’s research focuses on the First Amendment.
Friday round-up
Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee, by a vote of thirteen to six, passed a bill and resolution – which will now go to the full Senate for consideration – that would require the Court to televise oral arguments unless the Justices vote, in a particular case, to bar coverage.
Decisions on Monday
The Supreme Court expects to issue decisions in argued cases next Monday, at 10 a.m., the Court announced Friday. Orders resulting from today’s Conference will be released ahead of the opinions.
Update on felons’ voting rights
A long-running dispute over the denial of voting rights to those convicted of serious crimes — a dispute that some civil liberties advocates say is the next major battleground over voters’ rights — has so far not gained review in the Supreme Court.
Petitions to Watch | Conference of 4.30.10
This edition of “Petitions to Watch” features cases up for consideration at the Justices’ next private conference on Friday, April 30. As always, it lists the petitions on the Court’s paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted.
Stat Pack available
A preliminary Stat Pack analyzing the opinions for this Term through today is here.
This Term’s pending cases
So far, the Court has decided 33 of its argued cases this Term, including (as of yesterday) all cases argued during the October Sitting. However, 44 argued cases are still pending, and will be decided before the end of the Term.
“Kiyemba II,” back again?
In a legal move that very likely is a prelude to a Supreme Court appeal, an Algerian who has been imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay for more than eight years has begun a new challenge to a major ruling against detainees’ rights by the D.C. Circuit Court — a ruling that was left intact by the Supreme Court last month.
Cameras and the Supreme Court
Senator Arlen Specter and Congressman Ted Poe have introduced legislation in the Senate and House, respectively, that would require the Court to televise its public proceedings.
Thursday round-up
Yesterday at the Court featured not one but two highly anticipated events: the opinion in Salazar v. Buono, an Establishment Clause challenge to a cross in a public park on Establishment Clause grounds; and the oral argument in Doe v. Reed, a case brought by Washington State ballot initiative petition signers trying to conceal their identities.
Today at the Court
All scheduled oral arguments for the Term are done. No non-capital orders are expected today, but we will report promptly on any should they be issued.
No Class Arbitration Without Agreement
Below, Vivian Wang, a Stanford Law School student, discusses Tuesday’s opinion in Stolt-Nielson S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International (08-1198). Check the Stolt-Nielson SCOTUSwiki page for earlier coverage and briefs from the case.
Did Justice Stevens Change?
The essay below, by Joseph Thai, is part of our thirty-day series honoring John Paul Stevens. Thai was a clerk for Justice Stevens during the 2000 October Term, and is now a professor at the University of Oklahoma College of Law.
Notable Petitions
Two recently filed petitions are worth noting: U.S. Bank National Association ND v. Thomas (09-1161), which challenges certain state-law usury claims against banks, and Norfolk Dredging Company v. Misener Marine Construction, Inc. (09-1164), which seeks to clarify the status of certain state statutes affecting maritime law.
Today at the Court
This morning, shortly after 10 a.m. Eastern, the Court will convene to hear what is expected to be the final oral argument of the 2009 October Term: Doe #1 v. Reed (09-559).
Podcasts: Doe #1 v. Reed
For what is expected to be the final argument of October Term 2009, in Doe #1 v. Reed (09-559), we have a pair of five-minute podcasts with the arguing counsel on both sides.
Arbitrating arbitration: who reviews the enforceability of an agreement to arbitrate?
Below, Stanford Law School’s Caroline Jackson (no relation to the respondent) recaps Monday’s oral argument in Rent-A-Center v. Jackson. (Aaron Tang previewed the argument on Sunday for SCOTUSblog.) Check the Rent-A-Center v. Jackson (09-497) SCOTUSwiki page for additional updates.
LiveBlog: Opinions 4.28.10
This morning starting at 10 a.m. Eastern, the Court is expected to announce one or more opinions. We will relay them in the Live Blog below, with the assistance of our reporter at the Court, Lyle Denniston. We will publish the full texts of any slip opinions released in a separate post.
Wednesday round-up
Many journalists and Court watchers are focused on today’s oral argument in Doe v. Reed, a case about anonymity for political activists. The argument will be the final one for the Term, as well as for Justice Stevens.
A Special Honor for the Blog
I’m pleased to say that SCOTUSblog has been awarded the ABA’s Silver Gavel Award for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system. SCOTUSblog is the first blog ever to receive the honor. The award was based on our content throughout 2009.
Without Scalia, whither anonymity?
Analysis Justice Antonin Scalia, using history, sarcasm and political taunts, laid down a barrage of objections Wednesday to a plea that the Supreme Court create a new constitutional right of anonymity for individuals who sign petitions to get policy measures onto election ballots.
Much ado about a little cross
Analysis A spectator in the Supreme Court chamber Wednesday morning could well have understood that the Justices had just made a major new pronouncement on the constitutionality of placing religious monuments on government property.
Today’s transcript
The transcript of oral argument in Doe #1 v. Reed is here.
A tribute to Justice Stevens
The newest piece in our thirty-day series honoring John Paul Stevens, below, is a tribute from Stanley Temko, a co-clerk with Justice Stevens for Justice Wiley Rutledge during the 1947 Supreme Court Term and now senior counsel at Covington & Burling.
Not so fast in Doe v. Reed
I happened to be in the courtroom today for the argument in Doe v. Reed, which was Justice Stevens’ last argued case. Early reporting and commentary on the decision – with which I agree entirely – has been that the Court will affirm by a wide margin the Ninth Circuit’s refusal to grant the particular injunction now before the Court.
Anonymity for political activists?
Shortly after 10 a.m. on Wednesday, after decisions are released, the Supreme Court will hear one hour of oral argument in John Doe # 1, et al., v. Reed, et al. (09-559).
Congressional punting on awards of restitution
Below, Carl Cecere of Akin Gump recaps last week’s oral argument in Dolan v. United States. [DISCLOSURE: Akin Gump and Howe & Russell represent the petitioner in this case, but Carl was not involved in the proceedings.] Check the Dolan (09-367) SCOTUSwiki page for additional updates.
Today at the Court
This morning the Court will announce one or more opinions beginning at 10 a.m., and we will be live-blogging for the occasion. The Justices will then hear oral argument in Monsanto Company v. Geertson Seed Farms (09-475), in which it will consider what conditions must be met to obtain a nationwide injunction prohibiting the planting of genetically engineered crops.
LiveBlog: Opinions | 4.27.10
This morning starting at 10 a.m. Eastern, the Court is expected to issue one or more opinions. We will relay them in the Live Blog below, with the assistance of our reporter at the Court, Lyle Denniston. <a href=”http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php/option=com_mobile/task=viewaltcast/altcast_code=d058e95c9e” >Supreme Court Opinions, April 27</a>
Do NEPA violations cause irreparable harm?
Here, Stanford Law School’s Josh Patashnik previews this morning’s oral argument in 09-475, Monsanto Co. v. Geerston Seed Farms. Check the Monsanto SCOTUSwiki page for additional updates.
Tuesday round-up
Coverage of the Supreme Court focused heavily on Monday’s cert. grant in Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association, in which the Court will consider whether California may prohibit the sale of violent video games to children.
Selecting Stevens’ Successor
In my February post on the nomination process, I anticipated that the Administration would treat Solicitor General Elena Kagan and appellate judges Diane Wood and Merrick Garland as the leading candidates to replace Justice Stevens, and that it would ultimately select Kagan.
Today’s transcript
The transcript of oral argument in Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms (09-475) is here.
Attorney’s fees and retirees: is a “prevailing party” necessary under ERISA?
Below, Kyle Maurer of Stanford Law School recaps yesterday’s oral argument in Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co. (09-448). Check the Hardt SCOTUSwiki page for additional updates. Yesterday, the Court heard oral argument in Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co. (No. 09-448).
Getting His Clerkship
Below is an essay by John Q. Barrett for our thirty-day series on John Paul Stevens. Barrett is a professor of law at St. John’s University in New York City and Elizabeth S. Lenna Fellow at the Robert H. Jackson Center in Jamestown, New York.
NLRB case on track?
Both sides in a case the Supreme Court heard in March on the powers of the National Labor Relations Board urged the Court this week to go ahead and rule in the case, saying that the outcome of hundreds of past and potential future cases are or could be riding on the outcome.
The week ahead
This morning at 10 a.m., the Court will announce orders; tomorrow, and possibly Wednesday, we expect one or more opinions to be issued. The Justices will meet for another private conference this Friday.
Today at the Court
This morning at 10 a.m., the Court is expected to issue orders from its conference last Friday.
Determining the fairness of forced arbitration provisions
Below, Aaron Tang of Stanford Law School previews Rent-a-Center v. Jackson (09-497), in which the Court will hear oral arguments on Monday, April 26. Check the Rent-a-Center SCOTUSwiki page for additional updates.
Today’s orders
The Court has granted cert. in Ortiz v. Jordan (09-737) and Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association (08-1448). It has invited the views of the Solicitor General in Hogan v. Kaltag Tribal Council (09-960).
Court to rule on violent video games
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to rule on the constitutionality of a state law banning the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. The Court accepted for review an appeal by the state of California, urging the Court to adopt a new constitutional standard that would enable states to ban such games for those under age 18.
The importance of Stevens’ good manners
Below are Georgetown law professor Pamela Harris‘ reflections for our thirty-day series on John Paul Stevens. Harris was a clerk for Justice Stevens during the 1992 Supreme Court Term, and is now director of Georgetown’s Supreme Court Institute.
Today’s transcripts
The transcript of oral argument in Rent-A-Center v. Jackson is here. The transcript in the other case argued today, Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co., is here.
Monday round-up
The Court agreed to hear two cases this morning—Schwarzenegger v. Video Software Dealers Association and Ortiz v. Jordan, et al. The Schwarzenegger case, in which California is defending the constitutionality of a law prohibiting the sale of violent video games to minors, will address some of the same issues as United States v. Stevens, which the Court decided last week.
Debt collectors and “ignorance of the law”
Below, Jonathan Eisenman of Akin Gump recaps last week’s opinion in 08-1200, Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich LPA. Check the Jerman page on SCOTUSwiki for further information. [DISCLOSURE: Howe & Russell represented the petitioner in the case.]
The Potential Nomination of Merrick Garland
Background After graduating with honors from Harvard University and Harvard Law School, D.C. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland clerked for Judge Henry Friendly on the Second Circuit and then for Justice William Brennan.
FEC: Don’t rush SpeechNow
The Federal Election Commission, suggesting that the Supreme Court may well want to take on a new campaign finance case, has asked the D.C. Circuit Court not to rush into effect its March ruling in that case (SpeechNow.org, et al., v. FEC, Circuit docket 08-5223).
Academic round-up
Thomas K. Clancy (University of Mississippi School of Law) has posted “The Irrelevancy of the Fourth Amendment on the Roberts Court” on SSRN, see here.
Court rules on deference for retirement plan administrators
Below, Martine Cicconi of Stanford Law School recaps Wednesday’s ruling in Conkright v. Frommert. Martine’s preview and recap of the oral argument in the case are available here and here. Check the Conkright v. Frommert (08-810) SCOTUSwiki page for additional information.