You searched for we v. me - Page 3 of 19

Thoughts About United States v. Texas

April 18, 2016

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument earlier today in United States v. Texas, No. 15-674. Texas and 25 other states sued the federal government to prevent the implementation of deferred-action regarding certain undocumented immigrants.

Lyle Denniston has an excellent overview of the case and the oral argument in Oral Argument: Search for a Fifth Vote on Immigration at SCOTUSblog. And, of course, Nina Totenberg is always worth reading and listening to; her piece, with a byline shared with Eyder Peralta for NPR, is On Obama’s Immigration Actions, Supreme Court Seems Sharply Divided.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The judge who heard the case, Andrew Hanen, was tailor-made

immigration, texas, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

Leave a comment

Evenwel v. Abbott – The Decision

April 5, 2016

Mark Rubin

My primary piece on Evenwel v. Abbott, No. 14-940, One-Person/One Vote. Really?, ran on December 7, 2015. (It also discussed Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, No. 14-232, which has not yet been decided.)

Yesterday, in an 8-0 decision, the Court affirmed the decision of a three-judge panel, holding that Texas need not have state legislative redistricting maps based on voters, as opposed to people. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the opinion for the Court. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito concurred in the judgment.

The decision represents good news for Democrats and those who believe many voices should be heard. But it’s not especially bad news for the other side.

For decades, legislative districts have

evenwel v. abbott, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Law

Leave a comment

Justice Antonin Scalia, Three Weeks Later

March 4, 2016

Mark Rubin

I wrote Justice Antonin Scalia on February 18, and thought I’d said pretty much everything I had to say. Alas, not!

Justice Scalia died on February 13, only three weeks ago. What has me writing again is the evident impact his death has had on the U.S. Supreme Court and the country. No observant person ever doubted the fact that Justice Scalia was a force on the Court. I suspect, though, that even the sharpest observers are, like me (who is not a part of that cohort), goggle-eyed about how much has changed in 21 days. For proof, read The Supreme Court’s New Era by Linda Greenhouse—is a part of the sharpest observer cohort, and should maybe be its honorary

abortion, Chief Justice John Roberts, EPA, Justice Antonin Scalia

The Rest of Everything

Leave a comment

The Wednesday Curator – 2/10/2016

February 10, 2016

Mark Rubin

Read The Rise of Donald Trump is a Terrifying Moment in American Politics, written by Ezra Klein for Vox. On his FB page Mr. Klein wrote:

This is the harshest thing I have ever written about a major American politician. But I think it’s deserved.

Boy howdy yes, on both counts!

Stay tuned for more, this weekend, about the stay —. Lyle Denniston has the goods in Carbon Pollution Controls Put on Hold. This weekend? Jefferson Wins … and We’re Effed!

So what’s the fuss? An activist group of Supreme Court justices—five, to be exact (Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito)—stayed a set of regulations which were approved by a U.S. District Court judge and awaiting appellate review

Wednesday Curator

1 Comment

The Carmack Amendment

February 8, 2016

Mark Rubin

You’ve probably noticed the lack of regularity here. Apologies, but there are only so many hours in the day and stress has a way of shrink-wrapping them, so that an hour feels like it provided about three minutes worth of time for getting important things done.

Tuesday—Law Day, mostly, here at MRW—is upon us. Since moving is on my mind, I’m focused on the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act (49 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) The law—Section 14706 of the Act—addresses the rights, duties, and liability of common carriers who cross state lines, when a freight loss occurs.

The law is named after Senator Edward Carmack (D-Tenn.), who served in the U.S. Senate from

Carmack Amendment, Ida B. Wells, moving, Senator Edward Carmack

Law

1 Comment

Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association

January 11, 2016

Mark Rubin

Labor law is not my best subject, for sure. I’ve handled many employment cases, and still advise clients on employment matters. Labor law, though, connotes union-management issues, and it’s an area in which I don’t practice.

Qualifier noted, I found myself following Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, No. 14-915, the case in which the which the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to abolish the “agency fee” regimen associated with public sector unions. In part, this was a “how can you ignore it case,” written and talked about everywhere. It’s also a reminder that elections matter. Had some more people moved their asses off their couches and voted in Florida in 2000, and if a few tens of

friedrichs, labor law, Michael Carvin, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

1 Comment

The Wednesday Curator – 12/1/2015

December 1, 2015

Mark Rubin

Debbie Elliott handled Montgomery, Ala., Celebrates 60th Anniversary Of Bus Boycott for All Things Considered on Tuesday afternoon. Hearing a reenactment chilled me, and left me feeling the plight of Black people in a way new to me. Ms. Parks was sitting in the first row of the Negro section, with a full-up White section, when more people boarded the bus. Bus driver to Ms. Parks: “Let that man have your seat. Don’t you see him standing there?” Yes, I read the Invisible Man, but it’s the language and the base contempt that hit me, hard. Listen to the story!

I read Challenge the Oligarchy, Paul Krugman’s excellent review of Robert Reich’s new book, Saving Capitalism: For the Many,

Wednesday Curator

Leave a comment

Guns and the Second Amendment

November 30, 2015

Mark Rubin

In almost 21 months at this site, I’ve only written two posts that focused on guns and the Second Amendment. One of them, Guns: Embarrassed and Ashamed!, was posted less than three months ago, and its title tells you everything you need to know about my not saying enough about the problem of guns in America.

The Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting prompted this post. Three dead. Several others will survive. The alleged shooter’s motives are not clear, although some evidence suggests a relationship between his views on abortion and the situs.

President Obama said “enough is enough” after the shooting. He and many others have used the same words, too often, with no evident change in the

colorado springs, guns, second amendment

Law, The Rest of Everything

Leave a comment

Retention Elections at the Supreme Court

September 21, 2015

Mark Rubin

The United States Supreme Court is comprised of nine justices. Presently, their age span is 82 to 55, with four justices—Ginsburg, Scalia, Kennedy, and Breyer—between 77 and 82. On January 20, 2017, those four justices will be 83, 80, 80, and 78, respectively. They will also have been serving for 23, 30, 28, and 22 years, respectively.

My point? The 2016 election may be about only one thing which really matters: the composition of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many people holler about the Supreme Court. Some people are genuinely concerned about a group of people who come from remarkably similar professional backgrounds. Read Is the Court We Have the Court We Want?, which I wrote in May 2014, for

Justice Louis Brandeis, merit selection, Senator Ted Cruz, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

Leave a comment

United States Supreme Court 2015-16 Preview

September 7, 2015

Mark Rubin

October 5 is four weeks away. So what? Well, in 2015 October 5 happens to be the First Monday in October, and that means we’ll have a chance to watch the United States Supreme Court in action again. (In fact, although the Court is at recess from July through September, the justices deal with many administrative matters during the recess, and also address some substantive issues, like rejecting County Clerk Kim Davis’ attempt to draw the Court into her petty drama in Kentucky.)

So what can we expect in 2015-16? Plenty, of course. Scotusblog.com has listed the 30+ cases the Court has already accepted for review. From among them, here are a few which we likely here much about:

Hurst

one person-one vote, U.S. Supreme Court, united state supreme court

Law

Leave a comment