Showing 1–50 of 89 items published in January 2009, most recent first.
Stanford student Scott Noveck discusses oral argument in Kansas v. Ventris. Scott’s earlier discussion of the case is available here, on SCOTUSwiki. Kansas Solicitor General Stephen R. McAllister led off with a brief oral argument that saw only sparse questioning from the justices.
A high-profile U.S. criminal prosecution of intelligence agents of the Cuban government, at a trial in the midst of the large community of Cuban-Americans in Miami, reached the Supreme Court on Friday as the center of a broad new test of the right to a fair trial.
Update Friday p.m. The case has now been docketed as 08-964. Unless the time for a response is extended, it is due on March 2. —————– Not since 1981 has the Supreme Court undertaken to spell out the kinds of inventions that are eligible for patent rights — the exclusive rights to produce or use an invented device or process, or to license it to others for a royalty fee.
UPDATE Thursday p.m. President Obama signed the legislation into law on Thursday. A White House statement about the signing is here.
No oral arguments are scheduled and no non-capital orders are expected to be issued from the Court today. The Court is in a four-week recess. Oral arguments resume on February 23.
Stanford student Daniel Matro discusses last Wednesday’s oral argument in Corley v. US (07-10441). On Wednesday, the Court debated the fate of the McNabb-Mallory rule in light of Congress’s 1968 enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 3501 and the Court’s Miranda jurisprudence.
Stanford student JP Schnapper-Casteras discusses oral argument in Boyle v. US (No. 07-1309). JP’s earlier work on the case is available on SCOTUSwiki, here.
No oral arguments are scheduled at the Court this week. Oral arguments will resume February 23. On Monday, the Court will release the orders from the Justices’ private conference last Friday.
Today’s orders list is now available here. The Court granted certiorari in three cases: McDaniel v. Brown (08-559), Mohawk Industries v. Carpenter (08-678), and Maryland v. Shatzer (08-680). The filings are available after the jump.
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to clarify the power of police to resume questioning of a suspect, if there is a time lapse between the individual’s request for a lawyer and the start of new interrogation — in this case, a lapse of more than two years. This was one of three newly granted cases.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday that federal law protects a worker from being fired after telling investigators, in an internal probe, about sexual harassment on the job.
Tihe Supreme Court on Monday released the oral argument calendar for the session that begins Monday, March 23. The Court will hear only one case a day at each of the public sittings, in keeping with the plan to have more cases argued earlier in the Term.
Analysis In opinions so spare that the Supreme Court did not labor long to produce them, the Justices on Monday unanimously expanded the control that police can exercise at the scene of roadside traffic stops, and, again without dissent, pushed up the chain-of-command in prosecutors’ offices the protection of total immunity to liability for decisions made in preparing criminal cases for trial.
Today’s unanimous decision in Crawford v. Metropolitan Gov’t of Nashville and Davidson County, No. 06-1595, is another in a series of recent cases in which the Court has turned away requests to narrowly construe anti-retaliation provisions, generally by large margins.
Today the Court also issued a per curiam opinion in Nelson v. US, on sentencing guidelines. The ruling below, which held for the United States, is reversed and remanded. The opinion can be found here. Justice Breyer concurred in the judgment, joined by Justice Alito.
Analysis The Supreme Court settled two issues of workers’ benefits law on Monday, giving mostly clear directions to employee plan managers on how they are to deal with the consequences of divorce of a worker.
Amy Howe discusses today’s opinion in No. 07-1059, United States v. Eurodif, S.A. et al, together with No. 07-1078, USEC Inc. et al. v. Eurodif S.A. et al. [Note: As an associate at Steptoe & Johnson from 1998-2000, Amy represented USEC in several proceedings but was not involved in the federal court proceedings in this case.]
Lawyers for 17 Guantanamo Bay detainees who are members of a long-persecuted Chinese Muslim minority urged leaders of the new Obama Administration on Friday to order the immediate release of the prisoners, to live at least temporarily in the U.S. The plea was made in a letter to Attorney General-designate Eric H. Holder, Jr., Acting Attorney General Mark R. Filip, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.
Before the election, I wrote two posts (here and here) on likely Democratic nominees to the Supreme Court. It seems an appropriate time for an update. For example, despite my earlier predictions, Elliot Spitzer’s odds now seem lower, and President Obama is unlikely to appoint himself.
A federal judge in Washington, giving the new Obama Administration an early chance to directly influence the scope of legal rights of Guantanamo Bay detainees, on Thursday invited the government — if it wishes — to offer a new definition of “enemy combatant.” U.S. District Judge John D. Bates set a Feb. 9 deadline for such a filing, issuing an order in Hamlily v. Obama (District docket 05-763), and two other cases.
President Obama’s changed policy on military detention at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, announced Thursday, made no mention of the more than 600 prisoners the U.S. military now holds at another overseas prison — Bagram air base outside Kabul, Afghanistan.
Los Angeles Akin Gump associate Scott Street discusses Wednesday’s decision in Pearson v. Callahan (No. 07-751). On Wednesday, in an opinion authored by Justice Alito, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Pearson v. Callahan and discarded the rigid two-step process for analyzing a qualified immunity defense that it had developed in Saucier v. Katz.
At oral argument on Monday, January 12, both the Justices and counsel struggled through the complex issues raised by the various permitting processes of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and how those permits can be applied in the case of the Kensington gold mine.
The Supreme Court on Friday granted a Justice Department request to delay, until March 23, the filing of the federal government’s merits brief in Al-Marri v. Spagone (08-368).
Guest blogger and a visiting scholar at Georgetown University Law Center Nancy Leong discusses Wednesday’s decision in Pearson v. Callahan. Additional information is available on SCOTUSwiki, here.
UPDATE Thursday at midday: President Obama on Thursday signed into effect the Executive Order directing the closing of the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The final Order, containing his signature, is here.
No oral arguments are scheduled and no non-capital orders are expected to be issued from the Court today.
UPDATED 3:20 p.m. Acting Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler on Thursday asked the Supreme Court for a delay until March 23 for the federal government to file its brief on the merits in the Al-Marri case.
At 10 a.m., the Court will release the remaining orders from the Justices’ private conference on Friday. Following the release of orders, the Court will hear argument in Corley v. United States (07-10441), involving the suppression of voluntary confessions.
UPDATE Wednesday evening: Perhaps bringing this short-lived story to a close, President Obama on Wednesday took the oath of office again from Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., in the White House’s Map Room.
Today’s orders list is now available here. The Court invited the views of the Solicitor General in Abbott v. Abbott (08-645), filings for which are available after the jump.
Stanford student Daniel Matro previews this morning’s first argument, Corley v. US (07-10441). Additional information on the case is available from SCOTUSwiki, here.
Stanford student Scott Noveck previews this morning’s second argument, Kansas v. Ventris.
UPDATED The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused the federal government’s request to salvage a ten-year-old law seeking to ban minors’ access to sexually explicit material on the World Wide Web.
UPDATE 3:20 p.m. The new White House has begun circulating among selected news reporters some of the contents of a planned presidential Executive Order on the closing of the detention prison at Guantanamo Bay.
Lawyers for a Qatari national, held in U.S. military captivity for more than five years as a terrorism suspect, argued on Wednesday that Congress could not — merely by remaining silent — grant the President the authority to order his detention without criminal charges.
Here are links to the transcripts of Wednesday’s oral arguments: Corley v. U.S., 07-10441. Kansas v. Ventris, 07-1356. Nken v. Mukasey, 08-681. The blog apologizes for the tardiness of this posting.
On a point that I have emphasized in the past on this blog (in discussions of cases like Hein v. Freedom of Religion Foundation), Christopher Peters (Wayne State University Law School) has posted a paper on SSRN that examines the practice on the Roberts Court of “Under-the-Table Overruling” of precedent, see here.
The International Court of Justice ruled unanimously on Monday that the U.S. government violated a duty under international law by failing to stop Texas from excuting a Mexican national last summer.
On Monday, the Court will be closed in observance of the birth of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. On Tuesday, the Court will be closed for Inauguration Day.
The Blog of Legal Times reported here that Georgetown Law School Professor Neal Katyal was the leading candidate to serve as Principal Deputy Solicitor General. That choice has now been finalized, and he will begin work in the Office on January 20.
The Justices are scheduled to hold a private conference this morning, any grants from which could be announced this afternoon. We will provide coverage of any developments. To view our list of petitions to watch at today’s conference, click here.
In a case that potentially could go to the Supreme Court, a special federal appeals court that operates almost entirely in secret has ruled that Congress did not act unconstitutionally in giving the government power to order telecommunications companies to aid in warrant-less national security wiretapping — eavesdropping mainly aimed overseas, but possibly reaching inside the U.S. and American citizens.
The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether federal banking officials have sole authority to probe whether national banks discriminate against minorities in making home loans, thus excluding any state regulation in that field.
The Court granted certiorari in six cases today, filings for which are available after the jump. The list of orders is here.
No oral arguments are scheduled and no non-capital orders are expected to be issued from the Court today. Oral arguments will resume on Wednesday.
At 10 a.m., the Court may release one or more opinions in pending cases. We will provide coverage of any developments. Following the release of any opinions, the Court will hear argument in Puckett v. United States (07-9712), involving claims over the government breach of a plea agreement.
President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Biden will make a private visit to the Supreme Court Wednesday afternoon, meeting with the Justices and perhaps taking a tour, the Court announced Tuesday evening.
Dividing 5-4, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that it does not violate the Constitution for a judge to impose consecutive sentences based on facts that were not found by the jury, but by the judge.
By way of full disclosure, I was one of the defendant’s lawyers in the Herring case, though my involvement in it was very limited. I am not an expert on the Fourth Amendment, but my preliminary reaction is that we will at some point soon regard today’s Herring decision as one of the most important rulings in that field in the last quarter century.