Posted on June 9, 2011 at 8:21 am by Amanda Rice
The Justices are expected to issue opinions this morning at 10 a.m.; later today, they will meet for their private Conference (here are the petitions up for consideration that weâ€™re watching).
In the meantime, coverage of Californiaâ€™s plan to comply with the Courtâ€™s recent decision in Brown v. Plata, which requires the state to reduce prison overcrowding, continues. As Adam reported in yesterdayâ€™s round-up, the state plans to â€œmov[e] low-level offenders to county jails and build new prisons to accommodate serious criminalsâ€ At the WSJ Law Blog, Ashby Jones highlights the concerns of â€œlocal sheriffs,â€ who â€œsaid they fear the state would begin to transfer inmates without any [funding] support.â€ JURIST also has coverage of the proposal.
- At the Cockle Bur, Shon Hopwood discusses citation style in Supreme Court briefs. Writing from his experience at Cockle Printing, he notes that â€œ[m]ost attorneys use Bluebook style for citationsâ€ — â€œthe safest bet for citation styleâ€; however, he notes a few â€œpeculiaritiesâ€ of Supreme Court briefing style.
- On Monday the Court denied cert. in Martinez v. Regents of the University of California, a challenge to Californiaâ€™s policy of offering in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants to attend state high schools. A Los Angeles Times op-ed highlights almost uniformly negative reader responses to the program.
- The editorial board of the New York Times criticizes the recent decision by a federal district judge holding that corporations may make direct contributions to political candidates (Adam discussed reactions to the case in yesterdayâ€™s round-up, while Lyle summarized the decision for the blog here).Â The board described the decision as â€œCitizens Unitedâ€™s outrageous offspringâ€Â and accused the judge of simultaneously failing to properly apply Citizens United and â€œmimic[king] its model of extreme judicial activism.â€
- At the National Law Journal, Tony Mauro identifies some signs that â€œin the upper echelons of Supreme Court practice . . . diversity is blossoming where before there was none.â€