U.S. Supreme Court Archives - Page 2 of 2

United States Supreme Court 2015-16 Preview

September 7, 2015

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

Law

Leave a comment

It’s a Wrap at the U.S. Supreme Court

June 29, 2015

Mark Rubin

It’s a Wrap at the U.S. Supreme Court – 6/29/2015

It’s a wrap! The U.S. Supreme Court issued its last three opinions for the 2014-15 Term this morning. (Links are to SCOTUSblog pages, which have links to the Court opinions and other material.)

In Glossip v. Gross, No. 14-7955, the lethal injection/cruel and unusual punishment case, a 5-4 majority ruled against death row inmates on a claim about the use of midazolam, a part of the three-drug protocol for lethal injections. The inmates claimed using midazolam—used because states cannot purchase other drugs,. because manufacturers will not sell them for use in the execution process—may cause them to suffer unreasonable harm when the other two drugs are administered. According to

EPA, Independent Redistricting Commission, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

Leave a comment

Obergefell v. Hodges

June 27, 2015

Mark Rubin

In Obergefell v. Hodges, No. 14-556, the U.S. Supreme Court held that

… the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. The Court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. No longer may this liberty be denied to them. … and the State laws challenged by Petitioners in these cases are now held invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite sex couples.

The Court divided 5-4 along the

Jim Obergefell, Obergefell v. Hodges, same sex marriage, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

4 Comments

More on King v. Burwell

June 25, 2015

Mark Rubin

Well, well, well! A fine day it’s been for Americans, what with the ruling in King v. Burwell, No. 14-114. (Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., No. 13-1371, the important housing/disparate impact case, also provided plenty to cheer about. Because its issues are more complicated, I’m sticking the King and the Affordable Care Act for now.)

At lunch today my old Wingnut friend started on a rant about Obamacare being forced through Congress with no opportunities for R input. I bit for a moment, and then a sense of calm passed over me and I uttered these words: “What the f*ck am I arguing about? Your side lost.” By the by,

King v. Burwell, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

1 Comment

Supreme Court Update

June 22, 2015

Mark Rubin

Here’s the Supreme Court update for Monday, June 22. Four opinions issued. First up was Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, No. 13-720, which is the Spiderman patent case. (Details from MRW are at Spiderman Goes to the Supreme Court.) We called this one 6-3 or 7-2 for Marvel, hoping for a ruling in favor of friends Steve Kimble and Bob Grabb. Unfortunately, Marvel prevailed 6-3.

The other three cases the Court decided were: City of Los Angeles v. Patel, No. 13-1175; Kingsley v. Hendrickson, No. 14-6368; and Horne v. Department of Agriculture, No. 14-275. In Patel the Court affirmed a Ninth Circuit decision, finding that a statute which required hoteliers to provide a registry without

U.S. Supreme Court

Law

Leave a comment

Supreme Court Update

June 18, 2015

Mark Rubin

Update from U.S. Supreme Court – What’s Left?: Decisions today in: (1) Reed v. Town of Gilbert, AZ, No. 13-502, the sign ordinance/church case; and (2) Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, No. 14-144, the Texas license plate case. In Reed the Court rejected the local sign ordinance unanimously, as MRW predicted. In Walker the Court upheld the state’s right to regulate messages on license plates. (MRW missed blew this one completely.)

The other four decisions—Ohio v. Clark, No. 13-1352; Davis v. Ayala, No. 13-1428; Brumfeld v. Cain, No. 13-1433; and McFadden v. U.S., No. 14-378—all involved criminal law matters. In Ohio v. Clark the state prevailed; in

U.S. Supreme Court

Law

Leave a comment

U.S. Supreme Court – What’s Left?

June 15, 2015

Mark Rubin

On June 15 the U.S. Supreme Court issued decisions in Baker Botts L.L.P. v. ASARCO, No. 14-103, Reyes Mata v. Lynch, No. 14-185, and Kerry v. Din, No. 13-1402. The cases dealt, respectively, with: (1) a law firm’s right to get fees from a reorganized debtor for work associated with defending a fee application (No Go); (2) a procedural issue in immigration law; and (3) a woman’s liberty interest in having her “civil servant in the Taliban regime” Afghani husband get priority immigrant status. “No go” on the last one, too, and Justice Scalia—writing for himself, the Chief Justice, and Justice Thomas—beat up on the dissent. (Justices Kennedy and Alito concurred, but did not agree with Justice

King v. Burwell, Obergefell v. Hodges, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

2 Comments

Writing Matters … Mostly!

March 5, 2015

Mark Rubin

When I was a young man I recall some discussion—today it would be Internet buzz—about how writing didn’t matter anymore. We all talked to one another, and that made writing unnecessary.

Wrong! Writing matters greatly, almost always. Very recently, I got a decision in a case. My clients were right on both the facts and the law; however, the case was complicated. I filed a motion for summary judgment. It’s a request to the court, asking the court to accept the other side’s version of the facts and still rule in your side’s favor, on account of the law being on your side.

My clients prevailed. The right decision, although I was concerned until I got the ruling, as I’m

Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy, Justice Antonin Scalia, Obamacare, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

Leave a comment

DeBoer v. Snyder: An Update

January 19, 2015

Mark Rubin

On Friday, January 16, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to several same-sex couples, all of them plaintiffs in DeBoer v. Snyder, et al., No. 14-571. The plaintiffs have asked the Court to overrule the opinion issued by the 6th Circuit on November 6, 2014. (MRW covered that issue in Same Sex Marriage in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee: An Analysis of DeBoer v. Snyder.)

Certiorari was not unexpected, as the 4th, 7th, 9th, and 10th circuits have all ruled in favor of same sex marriage. Nothing requires the Court to resolve a split among the circuit courts, but it happens routinely when the split involves an issue that reaches many people.

In its order granting certiorari

DeBoer v. Snyder, Rick Hasen, U.S. Supreme Court

Law

5 Comments