On April 30 at 10 a.m., the Constitutional Accountability Center will host a review of the Court’s decisions thus far in the Term, as well as those still to come. Moderator Amy Howe will be joined by panelists Paul Smith, Yaakov Roth, and Elizabeth Wydra. More information is available on the CAC’s website.
- At Education Week’s School Law Blog, Mark Walsh reports on yesterday’s cert. denial in “a case involving allegations that a Pennsylvania school district systematically funneled a disproportionate number of African-American students into special education.”
- At The Hill, Mario Trujillo reports on recent comments by members of Congress suggesting that the Court “has itself to blame for the surreptitious recordings of court proceedings that have surfaced in the past year.”
- At The Motley Fool, Sean Williams asserts that, “whether you’re a supporter or opponent of Obamacare, you may have missed an important ‘ruling’ from the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week that resulted in Obamacare logging a key victory.”
- At Hamilton and Griffin on Rights, Janai Nelson discusses last week’s opinion in the Alabama redistricting cases, arguing that the decision “preserved an important nuance of Section 5 [of the Voting Rights Act] that will enable the law to operate effectively, particularly once Congress restores that provision to full strength.”
- In The National Law Journal (subscription required), Tony Mauro reports that “Chief Justice John Roberts Jr.’s offhand 2011 criticism of law review articles . . . has finally met its match in the form of … a law review article.””
- Writing for the Supreme Court Brief (subscription required), Mauro discusses a new law review article that explores “why the justices always save their biggest cases until the end of the term.”
- At the blog of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, Andrea Field discusses the recent oral arguments in the challenge to the EPA’s regulations of utility emissions,
A friendly reminder: We rely on our readers to send us links for the round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, or op-ed relating to the Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com.
The petition of the day is:
Issue: Whether the President's authority under 26 U.S.C. § 7443(f) to remove Tax Court judges violates the Constitution's separation of powers.
Ever since SCOTUS Map began keeping tabs on the Supreme Court Justices’ events off the bench, Justices Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Sonia Sotomayor have consistently topped our list for Busiest Justices (measured by the number of events) and Most Frequent Fliers (measured by how far each Justice travels from 1 First Street). In March alone, the trio accounted for sixty-nine percent (nine out of thirteen) of the month’s appearances, which kicked off with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg giving remarks at the 2015 Pro Bono Institute Annual Conference in Washington, D.C., on March 5. “[M]ay all who answer the Pro Bono Institute’s call continue to respond to needs outside themselves, to help repair tears in their communities, and to promote in ways best suited to them justice, equal and accessible to all,” Ginsburg told attendees. A transcript of Justice Ginsburg’s speech has been posted online. Continue reading »
The Supreme Court on Monday asked the federal government to offer its views on whether Congress acted unconstitutionally three years ago in ordering a federal court to require the surrender of assets owned by the central bank of Iran, Bank Markazi, to pay off victims of terrorism.
In other orders, the Court denied review in a case involving new voting rights restrictions in North Carolina, but its new order is likely to be overtaken by a trial in a lower federal court, scheduled for July. The Court did not grant any new cases for review, nor did it issue any opinions on the merits, as it began a two-week recess before holding its final argument session of the Term later this month.
Continue reading »
At Slate, Dahlia Lithwick contends that “[i]t’s an interesting exercise to read” the briefs filed by supporters of state bans on same-sex marriage “side by side with defenses of Indiana’s controversial Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It’s virtually impossible to reconcile the two types of arguments, even though the same groups that pushed for the same-sex-marriage bans are also pushing for the new state RFRAs.” And in The National Law Journal (subscription required), Tony Mauro and Marcia Coyle report on the two advocates who will make their debuts arguing at the Supreme Court in the same-sex marriage cases. Continue reading »
On Monday the Court issued orders from the April 3 Conference, which Lyle reported on. We do not expect opinions in argued cases. The next Conference is scheduled for April 17. Oral arguments will resume on April 20.
The petition of the day is:
Issue: Whether the pretrial restraint of a criminal defendant's legitimate, untainted assets (those not traceable to a criminal offense) needed to retain counsel of choice violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.
Oyez has posted audio and transcripts of this week’s arguments. The Court heard arguments this week in:
The Supreme Court confirmed on Friday that it will hear from five lawyers during the April 28 arguments in the same-sex marriage cases. In a brief order, the Justices allotted ninety minutes of time on the power of states to refuse to allow such marriages, and one hour on the power of states to refuse to recognize existing marriages.
Continue reading »