Editor's Note :

Editor's Note :

On Monday morning the court hears oral argument in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission. Ronald Mann has our preview.
On Monday morning the court also hears oral argument in Pereira v. Sessions. Jennifer Chacon has our preview.
On Monday afternoon the court hears oral argument in Chavez-Meza v. United States. Susan Klein has our preview.

Breaking News :

Breaking News :

Briefly Mentioned :

Briefly Noted :

There is a possibility of opinions on Tuesday at 10 a.m. We will begin live-blogging at 9:45 a.m.

This morning the Supreme Court added two new cases, consolidated for one hour of oral argument, to its docket for next term. Today’s grants mean that the justices will once again grapple with the Armed Career Criminal Act, which requires longer sentences for repeat offenders who commit crimes with guns and have been convicted of either violent felonies or serious drug crimes. The statute defines a violent felony as a crime that is “burglary, arson, or extortion, involves use of explosives, or otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” The ACCA does not specifically define what constitutes a “burglary,” but nearly 30 years ago the Supreme Court defined the term to include crimes involving illegal or unauthorized entry into a “building or structure” with the intent to commit a crime. In United States v. Stitt and United States v. Sims, the justices will consider whether the burglary of a “nonpermanent or mobile structure” – such as a mobile home, trailer or tent – that is adapted for someone to stay in it overnight qualifies as a “burglary” for purposes of the ACCA. The cases will almost certainly be argued in the fall.

Continue reading »

OT2017 #22: “Cf. Everything”

By on Apr 23, 2018 at 10:03 am

We’re live at the University of Akron School of Law to preview the Supreme Court’s final—and perhaps its most important—sitting of October Term 2017. Come for our predictions on the travel-ban case, Trump v. Hawaii. Stay for Ian’s rant on interstate egg regulation, Dan’s second thoughts on #GorsuchStyle, a radical proposal for habeas reform, and a whole lot more—including a recap of the court’s biggest opinion of the term so far, Sessions v. Dimaya. We also fill you in on the court’s slightly-less-exciting opinions in United States v. Microsoft and Wilson v. Sellers, discuss some interesting relists and take some great audience questions—including one by a Volokh Conspirator who makes a surprise appearance (listen ’til the end to find out who!).

Monday round-up

By on Apr 23, 2018 at 7:26 am

Today the Supreme Court kicks off its last week of oral arguments this term with arguments in three cases. The first is Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, which asks whether SEC administrative law judges are “officers of the United States” within the meaning of the appointments clause. Ronald Mann previewed the case for this blog. Leonardo Mangat and D.E. Wagner preview the case for Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. Subscript has a graphic explainer for the case. For The Wall Street Journal, Dave Michaels and Brent Kendall report that “[i]f the justices rule for Mr. Lucia, it could invalidate the penalties against him and give a leg up to a handful of other defendants who similarly disputed the hiring process for SEC judges [, which] also could encourage challenges from defendants who grappled with administrative law judges at other federal agencies.” At Bloomberg, Margaret Newkirk and Greg Stohr report that “[s]iding with [Lucia]—and against the SEC’s long-standing position—will be the Trump administration,” and that the case “amounts to a broadside aimed at the 1,900 administrative law judges (ALJs) who help federal agencies enforce laws and are a key part of the administrative ‘deep state’ that Trump has vowed to dismantle.” At Law360 (subscription required), Daniel Walfish analyzes Lucia’s “practical significance for pending and future cases, and the Trump administration’s unusual bid to weaken the independence of ALJs.” In an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, Philip Hamburger argues that “[t]here is … no reason for the justices to strain the Constitution to approve the SEC’s indirect appointment method.”

Continue reading »

Posted in Round-up
 
Share:

This week at the court

By on Apr 22, 2018 at 12:00 pm

The Supreme Court released orders from the April 20 conference on Monday. The justices added two cases to their docket for next term, United States v. Stitt and United States v. Sims, consolidated for one hour of argument. The justices also called for the views of the solicitor general in EVE-USA Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp.

There is a possibility of opinions on Tuesday at 10 a.m.

On Monday the justices will hear oral argument in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, Pereira v. Sessions and Chavez-Meza v. United States.

On Tuesday the justices will hear oral argument in Abbott v. Perez and Animal Science Products Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.

On Wednesday the justices will hear oral argument in Trump v. Hawaii.

On Friday the justices will meet for their April 27 conference; our “petitions to watch” for that conference will be available soon.

 
Share:

Petition of the day

By on Apr 20, 2018 at 6:30 pm

The petition of the day is:

17-1304

Issue: Whether a conviction under a state criminal statute whose plain terms sweep in more conduct than a corresponding federal offense can be a categorical match with that federal offense.

Oyez has posted the aligned audio and transcripts from this week’s oral arguments at the Supreme Court. The court heard argument this week in:

Posted in Merits Cases
 
Share:

SCOTUS Map: April 2018

By on Apr 20, 2018 at 12:30 pm

Could Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Clarence Thomas be the new Scalia/Ginsburg? At an April 3 lecture at Vanderbilt Law, Sotomayor mused that Thomas was the justice “with whom I probably disagree the most.” However, The Tennessean quoted Sotomayor as saying, “I can stand here and say that I just love the man as a person.” Additional coverage comes from Vanderbilt University News.

The next day, Sotomayor gave remarks at NYU Law’s new Guarini Institute for Global Legal Studies, sharing the stage with a former justice of the Constitutional Court of South Africa. NYU has coverage of the event and video online.

Continue reading »

 
Share:

Friday round-up

By on Apr 20, 2018 at 7:22 am

At AL.com, Kent Faulk reports that “Alabama on Thursday night executed 83-year-old Walter Leroy Moody for the 1989 pipe bombing death of a federal judge,” and that Moody “became the oldest inmate executed in the United States since the return of executions in the 1970s.” For The Washington Post, Mark Berman reports that “Moody unsuccessfully appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday to stop the execution.”

Courtney Lollar analyzes Wednesday’s argument in Lagos v. United States, which asks whether private investigation costs and a victim’s attorney’s fees are considered compensable losses under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act, for this blog. At Law360 (subscription required), Jimmy Hoover reports that “[t]he federal government faced headwinds … while defending a roughly $16 million restitution order against a former trucking company CEO who defrauded General Electric Capital Corp., as various justices voiced skepticism that the CEO should have to pay GE’s pricey legal fees under a federal victim’s restitution law.”

Continue reading »

Posted in Round-up
 
Share:

In its conference of April 20, 2018, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether the Eighth Amendment requires an inmate to prove an adequate alternative method of execution when raising an as-applied challenge to the state’s proposed method of execution based on his rare and severe medical condition; whether the Supreme Court should overrule the “separate sovereigns” exception to the double jeopardy clause; and whether the Federal Arbitration Act forecloses a state-law interpretation of an arbitration agreement that would authorize class arbitration based solely on general language commonly used in arbitration agreements.

Continue reading »

 
Share:

Petitions of the day

By on Apr 19, 2018 at 6:00 pm

The petition of the days are:

17-1284

Issue: Whether clearly established Eighth Amendment law permits prison officials to permanently deprive a prisoner in solitary confinement of outdoor exercise without a security rationale.

17-1289

Issue: Whether clearly established Eighth Amendment law permits prison officials to permanently deprive a prisoner in solitary confinement of outdoor exercise without a security rationale.

More Posts: Older Posts
Term Snapshot
Awards