Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

US Supreme Court Tag

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 13, 2018 40 Comments
Earlier today I was reading Prof. Josh Blackman's post responding to criticism he has received for using the term Judicial Resistance, On the Judicial Resistance:
Over the past year, I have discussed at some length the self-professed “legal resistance,” which has coordinated legal strategies to resist President Trump in the courts. This front is part of the broader #Resistance movement against President Trump in the political sphere. These actions are completely rational, and unsurprising from the party that (unexpectedly) lost the election....

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 13, 2018 103 Comments
During a discussion at Columbia University, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg blamed a "macho atmosphere" and rampant sexism for Hillary Clinton's 2016 electoral loss. "I think it was difficult for Hillary Clinton to get by even the macho atmosphere prevailing during that campaign, and she was criticized in a way I think no man would have been criticized," she said. "I think anyone who watched that campaign unfold would answer it the same way I did -- Yes, sexism played a prominent part."

Posted by Jared Samilow on February 05, 2018 26 Comments
On January 22, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, on a 5—2 party-line vote, struck down the state's congressional map and ordered the legislature to draw a new one by February 9. See my prior post, Bad news for GOP: Pennsylvania Supreme Court tosses state’s congressional maps. Two members of PA's state legislature—its Speaker of the House and president pro tempore of the Senate—quickly asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene and stay the ruling.

Posted by Jared Samilow on January 25, 2018 13 Comments
Three days ago, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania struck down the state's congressional map, holding that it "clearly, plainly and palpably violates the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania." Offering no rationale for this decision, which upends districts that have been in place for six years, the State Supreme Court further instructed the legislature to propose a new map by February 9, and get Democratic Governor Tom Wolf's approval before February 15. Otherwise, the court itself will decide the new maps that will be used for the 2018 primaries and midterms.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 23, 2018 21 Comments
After a bizarre and completely unfounded San Francisco federal District Court injunction against the Trump administration wind-down of DACA, the Trump administration both filed for leave to appeal in the 9th Circuit and filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment in the Supreme Court. That latter Petition would circumvent the 9th Circuit. The Trump administration, however, did not ask the Supreme Court to stay the District Court order, arguing that a stay would create more problems in the administrative wind-down of DACA:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 18, 2018 20 Comments
The government just filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment (full embed at bottom of post)(pdf.) in the Supreme Court seeking pre-judgement review of the federal District Court order preventing the Trump administration from terminating DACA. That District Court decision was absurd, as pointed out when we covered the decision, Judge prevents Trump from reversing Obama DACA policy.

Posted by Jared Samilow on January 13, 2018 17 Comments
We’re now on day 36 without a 4th Circuit decision on Trump's third travel order. Unveiled as a presidential proclamation on September 24, 2017, the third travel order (we'll call it EO-3) restricts entry by most nationals of Chad, Iran, Libya, Syria, and Yemen, as well as some nationals of North Korea and Venezuela.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 15, 2017 10 Comments
I have to admit, I fell asleep at the baker's wheel. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission was argued to the Supreme Court earlier this month and I, didn't cover it. Not out of lack of interest, but more feeling like we're chasing a swarm of daily dust ups created by (1) Trump Derangement Syndrome in all its many and varied forms, (2) Trump on Twitter, (3) media reacting to Trump on Twitter, (4) Alabama, (5) War on Women and #MeTwo, (6) Men at Work, (7) the End of the World. Plus, it was end of the semester, and things were busy. Excuses, I've had a few.

Posted by Jared Samilow on December 09, 2017 35 Comments

Friday night, the Supreme Court issued an Order (pdf.) staying a lower court ruling requiring the government to turn over thousands of documents related to the termination of DACA. The vote was 5 to 4, with Justice Breyer writing a 10-page dissent joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan.

The full Order and Dissent are embedded at the bottom of this post.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on November 17, 2017 21 Comments
I noted yesterday that Chuck Grassley finally appears ready to clear the backlog in Judiciary Committee hearings on Appeals and District court judicial nominees, by preventing withholding of "blue slips" from becoming de facto filibusters, Chuck Grassley rips up “blue slip” stall, Al Franken left groping for alternative delay tactic. It then will be up to Mitch McConnell to get nominees floor votes, and to overcome Democrat stalling tactics to draw out each nominee, even the ones they don't oppose. The goal has to be:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 11, 2017 16 Comments
We previously wrote how the U.S. Supreme Court was likely to dismiss the two Travel Order cases before it, one from the 4th Circuit (via Maryland District Court) and one from the 9th Circuit (via Hawaii District Court) on grounds of mootness. Both of those cases went against Trump. The 4th Circuit case became moot in late September because the Travel Order at issue (Travel Order No. 2) expired. In this context, mootness means there no longer is an actual case and controversy (a constitutional requirement for federal courts) to be decided by the court, because the Travel Order expired by its own terms.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 25, 2017 11 Comments
When Trump rolled out a new Permanent Travel Order last night, I noted that there was a substantial question whether this rendered the pending Supreme Court case as to Trave Order No. 2 moot:
So what happens to the pending Supreme Court case? It seems that so much of the case as sought an injunction against Travel Order No. 2 is moot, meaning there’s nothing left to enjoin. I’d have to dig deeper into the pleadings to know if the entire case goes away, but it seems that much of it will.
The Supreme Court just posted an Order requesting briefing specifically on the question of mootness, and canceling the scheduled October 5 oral argument:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 24, 2017 31 Comments
It seems like ancient history, but the original and replacement Travel Orders were meant to be temporary, to provide time for a security review. Those Orders were demagogued as "Muslim bans" when they clearly were not. They applied to the seven highest risk countries for terrorist visa infiltration as identified by the Obama Department of Homeland Security. What ensued were outrageous lower and appeals court decisions against the Travel Orders that read frequently like political manifestos.
Accessibility by WAH