MetaFilter posts tagged with supremecourt and scotus

Good news - it's Supreme Court Week.

IvoShandor — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:02:15 -0800

Beginning Sunday, October 4 it's Supreme Court Week on C-SPAN! If you don't know much about the U.S. Supreme Court this looks like it will be a good opportunity to change that. The week starts off when C-SPAN airs its original documentary "The Supreme Court: Home to America's Highest Court" at 9 pm (EST) on Oct. 4. (There is a preview of it in the first link). C-SPAN already spends time covering the Supreme Court and the network is known for its advocacy of cameras in the courts. Later in the week there will be some other good programming including interviews with the justices over the weekend of October 9. The web site already has some video up including a bit on the impact of the newest justice, some words from that new member (and other members) and some great stuff on the SCOTUS building, so make sure to check out the virtual tour. CSPAN has some video at its SCOTUS Week YouTube page as well. C-SPAN likes sponsoring polls too, on September 24 they released (PDF) a Supreme Court poll (PDF), not really a C-SPAN rarity. (PDF) And don't forget, no public money pays for C-SPAN.

Let the games begin

Navelgazer — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:40:43 -0800

Today began Judge Sonia Sotomayor's Senate confirmation hearings, with opening remarks from the Senators on the Judiciary Committee, introductions from NY Senators Schumer and Gillibrand, and an opening statement from Judge Sotomayor herself. Among the shouted protests from pro-life advocates in the gallery, highlights included Sen. Lindsay Graham's statement about what he thinks the advise-and-consent function of the senate should entail, and Sen. Al Franken's first real moment in the U.S. Congress.

By The Content Of Their Character

Law Talkin' Guy — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:28:48 -0800

Today, on the last day of this year's term, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in Ricci v. DeStefano, the latest in the Court's line of decisions on Title VII and the role of race in employment decisions. The famous case centers on white firefighters' claims of race discrimination following the town of New Haven's decision to scuttle a promotion exam after white test takers performed disproportionately better than black firefighters. The case has been covered extensively in blogs and the mainstream and local media. In addition to the high-stakes questions at issue in the case itself, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor sat on the panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that summarily decided the case at the intermediate appellate level.

Pleasant Grove City v. Summum

Non Prosequitur — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:16:33 -0800

The previously-mentioned Summums want to place their own monument in a park which contains the Ten Commandments, making the Supreme Court's heads explode in a a hilariously weird oral argument^[pdf]: "Scalia: I don't know what that means. You keep saying it, and I don't know what it means. [...] Breyer: Suppose that there certain messages that private people had like "eat vitamins"—and then somebody comes along with a totally different content, "ride the roller coaster," and they say this part of the park is designed to get healthy children, not put children at risk." At issue: "Pulling a crystalline, cogent rule out of the murk of the court's First Amendment, public forum, and Establishment Clause doctrine is an act of creation too complicated for mere mortals."

"we upheld against proportionality attack a sentence of 40 years' imprisonment for possession with intent to distribute nine ounces of marijuana" - Justice Kennedy

daksya — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:04:29 -0800

DrugPolicyCases.com - Yakov Spektor, a New York-based attorney, combed through two decades of US Supreme Court opinions "to discern certain trends in the Court's treatment of various issues" related to the War on Drugs. The collection of opinions are organized by case, author and topic.

Two doors down

Kirth Gerson — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 07:42:35 -0800

This happens a lot. I mean a lot. All over the place. All these stories are within the last five weeks. Inexcusable, some say. If they break in and cause damage, they have to pay, though, right? Not according to the U.S. Supreme Court, which says if your address is on the warrant, you get to pay, even if it's a mistake.

Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

homunculus — Tue, 08 May 2007 21:25:58 -0800

New Justices, New Rules: How the Supreme Court's Validation of the Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Affects Women's Constitutional Liberty and Equality. A two-part FindLaw analysis of Gonzales v. Carhart.

Abortions for none, miniature American flags for others

XQUZYPHYR — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 07:57:08 -0800

The Supreme Court has upheld the federal ban on "Partial-Birth Abortion," in a 5-4 decision. The federal ban provides no exceptions for the health of the mother, the reason previous Courts overturned the law. Justice Kennedy argued the law banning the procedure should stay, as opponents "have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases." In a scathing dissent, Justice Ginsburg alluded to the politics of recent judicial appointments, noting "...the Court's defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court -- and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women's lives. A decision of the character the Court makes today should not have staying power."

Luttig resigns Fourth Circuit post.

monju_bosatsu — Wed, 10 May 2006 09:28:11 -0800

Luttig Resigns. Judge J. Michael Luttig, long considered a front-runner for a Supreme Court nomination, at least until he was passed over by President Bush, has resigned his position on the Fourth circuit. Luttig will take over as general counsel to Boeing. Read Boeing's press release and Luttig's resignation letter [pdf].

Pontius Pilate — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 02:39:55 -0800

The Fourth Amendment provides, in part, that "...no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause." The Supreme Court has issued its (yet another) 8-0 opinion, authored by Justice Scalia in the case of United States v. Grubbs, overturning the Ninth Circuit decision. Justice Souter filed a concurring opinion. Grubbs deals with the question of anticipatory warrants, and it is the first time that the Court has addressed the practice. It appears that under this ruling, preemptive warrants can issue without existing probable cause, but merely on the supposition that probable cause will exist in the future.

Some legal scholars had anticipated that at least the more conservative members of the Court would rule against anticipatory warrants. After all, under Blackstone's analysis of the common law rule that contributed to the Fourth Amendment, as noted by Professor Orin Kerr in the NYU Journal of Law and Liberty symposium on the subject, warrants "issue" when they are signed by the judge, and not when the precedent condition occurs. Professor Chris Slobogin disagrees. Kerr has posted a preliminary analysis of the decision on his new blawg. The case has previously been discussed by the smart people over at the Volokh Conspiracy.

Just how important are law clerks?

monju_bosatsu — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:55:52 -0800

David Garrow reviewed Justice Blackmun's papers, released to the public in 2005, and concludes that towards the end of his career, Blackmun's clerks all but signed his opinions. In an interview, discussing senility and Supreme Court Justices, Garrow argues that there has been "a dramatic increase over the last 35 or 45 years in the amount of the justices’ work that is performed by their law clerks," and recommends a "reduction to two or, even better yet, one clerk" from the four clerks available per Justice now. Garrow also comments on the now-deceased Chief Justice Rehnquist, who suffered from an addiction to painkillers in the 1980s. Garrow's view is controversial, though, and Legal Affairs published several responses in the same issue. Other law professors have weighed in, including Dan Markel, Mark Tushnet, and some of the folks at the Volokh Conspiracy. So how large is the impact of law clerks?

Supreme Court Oral Argument MP3s.

monju_bosatsu — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:38:50 -0800

The Oyez Project has placed online mp3s for all of the arguments from the 2004 term of the United States Supreme Court. The 2004 terms spans all cases argued between October 4, 2004, and April 27, 2005, including United States v. Booker and United States v. FanFan, Roper v. Simmons , Raich v. Gonzales, Kelo v. City of New London, McCreary County v. ACLU, and Van Orden v. Perry. [slightly more inside]

Alito's First Vote

monju_bosatsu — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:25:11 -0800

Alito's First Vote. In his first significant act on the Supreme Court, Justice Alito splits with his conservative colleagues, and votes to refuse to let Missouri execute a death-row inmate contesting lethal injection. You can read the (very short) order on page four of yesterday's order sheet [pdf]. More commentary at SCOTUSblog, and discussion of Alito's approach to the death penalty is available at Sentencing Law & Policy.

Alito is Supreme

doctor_negative — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:28:56 -0800

Samuel Alito was sworn in as the nation's 110th Supreme Court justice Tuesday after being confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 58-42.(CNN)

John Kerry: This morning, 42 Senators voted against Alito's nomination. That's the highest number of votes against any Supreme Court nominee since Clarence Thomas in 1991. (from Kerry's email)

Rumsfeld v. FAIR

thirteenkiller — Wed, 07 Dec 2005 17:16:38 -0800

The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in Rumsfeld v. FAIR, a case challenging the Solomon Amendment, a US federal law that allows the government to cut federal funding to universities that refuse to allow military recruiting on campus. FAIR is a coalition of law schools challenging this law on the basis that the US military's policy of prohibiting open homosexuals from serving violates the schools' anti-discrimination policies (see section 6-3). Summing the issue up nicely, the dean of one law school said of the US military, "If it were a private employer who discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation, race or gender, we wouldn't allow them here on campus." .rm C-SPAN coverage here.

Grokster shuts down

falconred — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:26:58 -0800

Grokster shuts down after their Supreme Court defeat [pdf] this summer, Grokster has chosen to settle its case with MGM et al., admit to wrongdoing, and stop distributing its software. Their website now displays the message: "There are legal services for downloading music and movies. This service is not one of them.". Another victoy for Hollywood in the intellectual property war. Who's next?

The blog of the #1 smartest President ever's #1 pick to be the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court!

clevershark — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:26:33 -0800

Harriet Miers's Blog!!! Silly parody web site in the tradition of the Jeff Gannon blog (related: see Knot Jeff Gannon) and the short-lived Osama blog (not too many internet cafes in Baluchistan apparently), or light-hearted response to this really obvious bit of astroturfing by FOBs (friends of Bush) known to bend the truth a little to help out a pal in need?

This Highway Adoped By the Ku Klux Klan

expriest — Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:42:58 -0800

This Highway Adopted By The Ku Klux Klan The US Supreme Court has declined an appeal by the state of Missouri seeking to reverse an 8th Circuit opinion which allows the Ku Klux Klan to adopt a highway. Under the controlling ruling of the 8th Circuit, "desire to exclude controversial organizations in order to prevent 'road rage' or public backlash on the highways against the adopters' unpopular beliefs is simply not a legitimate governmental interest that would support the enactment of speech-abridging regulations."

Taking the Long View

Sidhedevil — Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:42:36 -0800

Only in 1967 did Loving v. Virginia overturn vigorously-enforced laws against interracial marriage in these 15 states--Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. Only in 1964 did the Civil Rights Act overturn laws against equal access to voting, public accommodation, and public education. Only in 1963 did the Equal Pay Act mandate that men and women be paid the same wage for the same work at the same job. History isn't a superhighway, leading us in straight lines toward utopia. We fall back and we move forward, but over the past fifty years, the United States has become considerably more inclusive and equality of access to opportunity has widened. Take a look at this article from the Atlantic Monthly in 1956--1956!--if you don't believe me.

Supreme Court Judge Hospitalized - ThyroidFilter

bshort — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:51:12 -0800

Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist has been hospitalized for treatment of thyroid cancer. Doctors expect to release the 80 year old chief justice later this week. Rehnquist had a tracheotomy on Sunday after being admitted to Bethesda on Friday. More coverage abounds.

A blow for freedom

acrobat — Tue, 06 Jul 2004 07:42:33 -0800

The supreme court ruling that Guant?namo Bay prisoners can challenge their detention in the US is something that renews hope that America is not going down the drain. Slowly everyone understands the madness this administration wanted to drag us all in.

SCOTUS goes gay

mathowie — Thu, 26 Jun 2003 08:00:24 -0800

Supreme Court wisely rules that you can't legislate morality and that privacy between consenting adults is a-ok as the Texas sodomy law (that applies to homosexuals only) is struck down. Ruling invalidates other remaining sodomy laws on the books. Dancing in the streets ensues. And as usual, Scalia gets to add his wisecracks in the dissent. [via SCOTUSblog]

civil disobedience

Ty Webb — Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:57:44 -0800

National Organization for Women v. Scheidler Is being heard by SCOTUS today. The case may decide whether non-violent civil disobedience can be prosecuted under federal RICO laws. Here's the ACLU's amicus brief. And comments from NRO's Rod Dreher.

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:05:55 -0800

Three Supreme Court Justices publicy oppose executing teenage criminals. In a rare move, Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Stevens made a public statement in a delay request to state their opposition to executing someone who committed murder before the age of 18. With the Court already banning the execution of the mentally retarded this year, is this another sign of a soon-to-be next step in the abolishment of the death penalty? Or does the average American still believe that regardless of what time, when you do the crime you walk the line?

tiny pea — Mon, 13 May 2002 10:32:36 -0800

In an 8-1 ruling with Justice Stevens dissenting, the U.S. Supreme Court has partially upheld the Child Online Protection Act against objections that by relying on community standards it was unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment. COPA is the 1998 federal law making it illegal to make pornography available to children on the Internet. Passed in the wake of the Court's 1997 ruling striking down the Communications Decency Act but never enforced because of various court injunctions, COPA is still undergoing other lower-court challenges whose merits today's ruling does not address.