Monday round-up
on Jun 17, 2013 at 8:46 am
This weekend’s coverage highlights the Term’s most anticipated decisions, including last Thursday’s opinion in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., as well as the Court’s cases on same-sex marriage, affirmative action, and the Voting Rights Act.
On Thursday, the Justices issued a unanimous opinion in Myriad, holding that isolated human genes are not patentable because they are a product of nature, but that synthetic complementary DNA (“cDNA”) may be patented because it is not. Additional coverage of this decision comes from the Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall.
With the Court having not yet issued its opinions in Hollingsworth v. Perry, United States v. Windsor, Shelby County v. Holder, and Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, commentators continue to speculate about and debate the possible outcomes of these cases. Buzzfeed‘s Chris Geidner examines the paths that both Perry and Windsor, the challenges to California’s ban on same-sex marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, respectively, took to the Court, as well as what the decisions in these cases might look like. At ACSblog, Jeremy Leaming reports on remarks by Rep. John Lewis at this year’s American Constitution Society convention, in which he urged supporters of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to be ready to mobilize if the Court invalidates that provision in Shelby County. And in anticipation of the Court’s decision in Fisher (in which the Court is considering the constitutionality of the school’s use of race in its undergraduate admissions process) – and in response to this op-ed in The New York Times – The Washington Post features this op-ed by Richard Kahlenberg, who argues for class-based affirmative action over similar programs based on race.
Finally, the weekend’s coverage included coverage by the National Law Journal’s Tony Mauro and JURIST‘s Kimberly Bennett of the new regulation that prohibits demonstrations on the grounds of the Court. As Lyle reported last week, a federal district judge struck down the federal law that banning such demonstrations. In response, court marshal Pamela Talkin, with the approval of the Chief Justice, promulgated a new regulation invoking a different law.
Briefly:
- This blog’s Miriam Seifter analyzes Thursday’s opinion in American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, in which the Court held that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act expressly preempts two provisions in the concession agreements between the port of Los Angeles and short-haul trucking companies.
- At Fed Regs Advisor, Leland Beck discusses a recent decision by the Fourth Circuit holding that the National Labor Relations Board had no statutory authority to promulgate its “posting rule,” as well as the likelihood that the Court will grant cert. to review that decision.
Disclosures: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, represented the American Association of Law Schools as an amicus in Fisher. The firm was also among the counsel to Representative F. James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County. In addition, the firm’s Tejinder Singh was among the counsel on an amicus brief filed by international human rights advocates in support of the respondents in Perry, while the firm’s Kevin Russell was among the counsel on an amicus brief filed by former senators in support of Edith Windsor in Windsor.
