Tuesday round-up
Dahlia Lithwick and Ashby Jones discuss the Court’s female Justices; meanwhile, the New York Times’ editorial board opines on Wal-Mart’s cert. petition, and Joan Biskupic previews Snyder v. Phelps.
Showing 1–50 of 80 items published in August 2010, most recent first.
Dahlia Lithwick and Ashby Jones discuss the Court’s female Justices; meanwhile, the New York Times’ editorial board opines on Wal-Mart’s cert. petition, and Joan Biskupic previews Snyder v. Phelps.
The DC Circuit, in 113 pages of opinions, denies en banc review in Al-Bihani v. Obama, in which the court had upheld a broad reading of the government’s authority to detain non-citizens suspected of terrorism.
Petitioners’ briefs are due in four cases, and a reply brief is scheduled for filing in NASA v. Nelson.
Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor speak at the Tenth Circuit Bench and Bar Conference
Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal recommends that the Court deny certiorari in two cases.
Several sources report on the Acting Solicitor General’s new filing on behalf of the Tennessee Valley Authority, while others cover Justice Sotomayor’s remarks at the University of Denver.
New briefs have been added to a number of case pages on our sister site, SCOTUSwiki.
British American Tobacco Co.’s lawyers notify the Court of a recent ruling concerning RICO’s overseas reach, as part of a plea for rehearing following the Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank.
Professor Abbe Gluck discusses statutory interpretation in a new article in the Yale Law Journal.
New appeals have been filed on tribal sovereign immunity, the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, the balance between state common-law claims and federal foreign policy interests, and deference to prison medical professionals.
Wal-Mart’s filing of a cert. petition in a massive gender discrimination case dominates today’s headlines. In the petition, the company – which is the nation’s largest private employer – asks the Court to review an en banc ruling of the Ninth Circuit allowing over one million women to pursue their claims for damages as a class.
Responding to an order by the Court, a federal district court judge in Georgia found that death-row inmate Troy Anthony Davis “is not innocent” of murdering a police officer twenty-one years ago.
Wal-Mart files a petition asking the Supreme Court to limit payroll-wide lawsuits in job bias cases, asserting that the Ninth Circuit stripped it of its legal defenses in a discrimination claim affecting at least 1.5 million female employees.
The “Notable petitions” feature lists petitions that are likely to appear on our “Petitions to watch” list when they are scheduled for consideration by the Justices. “Notable petitions” are those that Tom has identified as raising one or more questions that has a reasonable chance of being granted in an appropriate case.
At Balkinization, Jason Mazzone analyzes an assertion made by now-retired Justice Stevens in his dissenting opinion in McDonald v. Chicago – that provisions of the Bill of Rights do not need to apply the same way everywhere.
The “Notable petitions” feature lists petitions that are likely to appear on our “Petitions to watch” list when they are scheduled for consideration by the Justices. “Notable petitions” are those that Tom has identified as raising one or more questions that has a reasonable chance of being granted in an appropriate case.
Carrying out a direct order of the Supreme Court, a federal judge in Georgia made a lengthy new study of a 21-year-old murder case but then ruled Tuesday that a Savannah, Ga., man had not proved that he is innocent of killing a police officer in a fast-food restaurant parking lot.
In new filings in the D.C. Circuit, lawyers for 31 Guantanamo detainees indicated that they will return to the Supreme Court if lower courts rule against the authority of federal judges to control the detainees’ fate.
Merits briefs are due this week in Harrington v. Richter, Chase Bank v. McCoy, and Flores-Villar v. United States, among others
Our sister site, SCOTUSwiki, has been updated to include new filings in the Arizona tuition credit cases and others.
At the Washington Post, Philip Kennicott discusses a resolution, recently introduced by Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), “calling on the Supreme Court to reopen the iconic [front] doors,” which were closed in early May for security reasons.
The Court has released a schedule of the cases to be argued in November, including Schwarzenegger v. EMA, Sossamon v. Texas, and Arizona’s tuition credit cases.
The “Notable Petitions” feature lists petitions that are likely to appear on our “Petitions to Watch” list when they are scheduled for consideration by the Justices. “Notable Petitions” are those that Tom has identified as raising one or more questions that has a reasonable chance of being granted in an appropriate case.
Sitting by designation on the First Circuit, retired Justice David Souter wrote for a panel that recently upheld the constitutionality of revisions to a Massachusetts curriculum guide on the Armenian genocide, Constitutional Law Prof Blog reports.
A new filing suggests that the Court should consider avoiding ruling on a case concerning tuition tax credits for parents of parochial school students until the impact of a new Arizona state law has been assessed.
At the American Constitution Society, Rick Hasen analyzes the significance of the Ninth Circuit’s decision to issue a stay of Judge Walker’s decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, concluding that “both opponents and proponents of gay marriage should read very little into” the order.
The “Notable Petitions” feature lists petitions that are likely to appear on our “Petitions to Watch” list when they are scheduled for consideration by the Justices. “Notable Petitions” are those that Tom has identified as raising one or more questions that has a reasonable chance of being granted in an appropriate case.
In brief, here are today’s stories on the Supreme Court:
Six of the 39 former lower court clerks scheduled to work for Justices this term are alumni of D.C. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland’s chambers.
Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted of conspiracy in connection with the September 11 terrorist attacks, has allowed the time to file an appeal to run out, declining to authorize his attorneys to file a petition for review with the Supreme Court.
As Lyle Denniston explains on this blog, late yesterday the Ninth Circuit delayed the granting of same-sex marriage licenses in California at least until December and ordered the proponents of Proposition 8 to brief the issue of their standing to challenge U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker’s August 4 decision striking down the law.
The Ninth Circuit Court on Tuesday morning ordered an expedited review of a second appeal on California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage — a plea by local officials in Imperial County, Calif., to enter the case in order to defend the ballot measure’s constitutionality.
The Court is in recess for the summer; it is expected to return on October 4 for the first oral argument of October Term 2010. The schedule of merits briefs due this week follows the jump.
We have updated SCOTUSwiki to include new merits briefs in Snyder v. Phelps, NASA v. Nelson, and the Arizona tuition cases, among others.
On Friday, the California Attorney General notified the Ninth Circuit that the state would not appeal Judge Walker’s decision in the Proposition 8 case, as Lyle Denniston of this blog reports.
The Supreme Court on Monday put an end to a running battle between a California lawyer — a prominent figure in the movement to challenge the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s Presidency — and a federal judge in Georgia.
Backers of California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage in that state on Monday questioned whether a federal judge lacked the authority even to rule in the federal constitutional case, so his ruling striking down the ban must be wiped out.
UPDATE 8:55 p.m. The lawyers who won the challenge to Proposition 8 in District Court do not plan to ask the Supreme Court to lift the stay issued by the Ninth Circuit.
California’s Attorney General, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., formally notified the Ninth Circuit Court Friday night that the state will not appeal a federal judge’s ruling striking down the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage.
Analysis From the moment nearly 15 months ago that two master legal tacticians, David Boies and Theodore Olson, launched the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, it was almost universally expected that it would become a historic Supreme Court test of gay marriage and the Constitution.
Yesterday afternoon, federal district court judge Vaughn Walker declined to stay his decision invalidating California’s ban on same-sex marriage, re-igniting speculation that the issue will soon come before the Supreme Court.
Now that Elena Kagan has left her post, who will replace her as the government’s chief advocate before the Supreme Court?
A motions panel of the Ninth Circuit Court on Friday set a fast schedule for reviewing a plea to put on hold, for several months, a federal judge’s ruling striking down California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage.
Lawyers involved in the federal constitutional case over California’s ban on same-sex marriage — Proposition 8 — said Wednesday night that the judge will rule Thursday afternoon on whether to delay or put into effect his ruling striking down the ban.
Through Sunday, August 15, we are continuing to accept applications for both blog internships, as well as for the job opening for a special assistant to Tom Goldstein/Howe & Russell office manager/SCOTUSblog staff member.
Above the Law reports that newly confirmed Justice Elena Kagan has hired four law clerks, three of whom have just finished clerking for other Justices.
UPDATE: Within a few hours after the judge refused their plea to postpone his ruling for more than a few days, the sponsors of Proposition 8 filed an emergency motion for a stay with the Ninth Circuit.
With Elena Kagan now embarking on her new role as a Justice, attention has turned to who might fill the role she is leaving, and when.
Extensive academic coverage of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, including criticism from the Michigan Law Review, as well as symposia from Lewis & Clark and Penn State.
Supreme Court news continues to focus on now-Justice Kagan.