<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Most Important Cases of This Term?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/</link>
	<description>The Supreme Court of the United States blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:38:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Stras</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11059</link>
		<dc:creator>David Stras</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 04:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11059</guid>
		<description>I would just like to thank everyone for their comments on this post.  I now have a pretty nice (and somewhat long) list of important cases for this Term.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would just like to thank everyone for their comments on this post.  I now have a pretty nice (and somewhat long) list of important cases for this Term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacques McKenzie</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11058</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacques McKenzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2007 04:18:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11058</guid>
		<description>Now, wait. I didn&#039;t mean vindicate. I meant &lt;i&gt;eradicate&lt;/i&gt;.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now, wait. I didn&#8217;t mean vindicate. I meant <i>eradicate</i>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacques McKenzie</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11057</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacques McKenzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2007 04:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11057</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;If SCOTUS decides that the Texas CCA must decide (again) whether the Vienna Convention violation caused Medellin any prejudice, it should take them very little time to answer that question &quot;no&quot; and finally schedule the very long overdue punishment for this truly horrific crime.&lt;/i&gt;
You know, Kent, it&#039;s about providing the right process, not about outcomes. As much as parochial Texas judges would love to put a Mexican to death, that value is counterbalanced, if not outweighed, by the President&#039;s determination pursuant to his own foreign affairs power and the treaty scheme Congress authorized. If the Supreme Court was right to take up &lt;i&gt;Roper v. Simmons&lt;/i&gt;, then it certainly should intervene to vindicate the Texas CCA&#039;s willful misconstrual of Presidential powers and our treaty obligations in furtherance of good old Texan bloodlust.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>If SCOTUS decides that the Texas CCA must decide (again) whether the Vienna Convention violation caused Medellin any prejudice, it should take them very little time to answer that question &#8220;no&#8221; and finally schedule the very long overdue punishment for this truly horrific crime.</i></p>
<p>You know, Kent, it&#8217;s about providing the right process, not about outcomes. As much as parochial Texas judges would love to put a Mexican to death, that value is counterbalanced, if not outweighed, by the President&#8217;s determination pursuant to his own foreign affairs power and the treaty scheme Congress authorized. If the Supreme Court was right to take up <i>Roper v. Simmons</i>, then it certainly should intervene to vindicate the Texas CCA&#8217;s willful misconstrual of Presidential powers and our treaty obligations in furtherance of good old Texan bloodlust.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted Metzler</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11056</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted Metzler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:47:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11056</guid>
		<description>Clearly no issue this term can trump the importance of Limtiaco v. Camacho, regarding the interpretation of debt limits in the Guam Organic Act!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clearly no issue this term can trump the importance of Limtiaco v. Camacho, regarding the interpretation of debt limits in the Guam Organic Act!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Street</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11055</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Street</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11055</guid>
		<description>Based on my own personal experience wrestling with this issue, I would cast an underdog vote for Carey v. Musladin. It has the potential to severely limit the availability of habeas corpus relief for state prisoners.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Based on my own personal experience wrestling with this issue, I would cast an underdog vote for Carey v. Musladin. It has the potential to severely limit the availability of habeas corpus relief for state prisoners.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kent Scheidegger</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11054</link>
		<dc:creator>Kent Scheidegger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 23:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11054</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d love to see them resolve &lt;i&gt;Medellin&lt;/i&gt; this term also, Jacques, but IMHO there isn&#039;t a snowball&#039;s chance in hell they will.
If SCOTUS decides that the Texas CCA must decide (again) whether the Vienna Convention violation caused Medellin any prejudice, it should take them very little time to answer that question &quot;no&quot; and finally schedule the very long overdue punishment for this truly horrific crime.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d love to see them resolve <i>Medellin</i> this term also, Jacques, but IMHO there isn&#8217;t a snowball&#8217;s chance in hell they will.</p>
<p>If SCOTUS decides that the Texas CCA must decide (again) whether the Vienna Convention violation caused Medellin any prejudice, it should take them very little time to answer that question &#8220;no&#8221; and finally schedule the very long overdue punishment for this truly horrific crime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lauren Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11053</link>
		<dc:creator>Lauren Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11053</guid>
		<description>Hein v. Freedom From
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hein v. Freedom From</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elizabeth Nugent</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11052</link>
		<dc:creator>Elizabeth Nugent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11052</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;KSR&lt;/i&gt; is in a specialized area, but it could have enormous economic implications for many, many industries.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>KSR</i> is in a specialized area, but it could have enormous economic implications for many, many industries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JPS3L</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11051</link>
		<dc:creator>JPS3L</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11051</guid>
		<description>My view is that Wilkie v. Robbins, No. 06-219, has enormous potential. Were the Bivens remedy doctrine expanded beyond the contours articulated in Chilicky, it could have a serious impact on the detainee cases. A more expansive use of judicial remedies in cases where the legislative remedy is thought too weak for the constitutional trespass at steak could, in turn, be used to argue that the administrative hearings set forth in the MCA and DTA are insufficient. That said, I do not think the Court will expand Bivens because it would be such an egregious power grab of legislative prerogative. At least, I would be hugely disappointed if that were to happen.
-James Sexton
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My view is that Wilkie v. Robbins, No. 06-219, has enormous potential. Were the Bivens remedy doctrine expanded beyond the contours articulated in Chilicky, it could have a serious impact on the detainee cases. A more expansive use of judicial remedies in cases where the legislative remedy is thought too weak for the constitutional trespass at steak could, in turn, be used to argue that the administrative hearings set forth in the MCA and DTA are insufficient. That said, I do not think the Court will expand Bivens because it would be such an egregious power grab of legislative prerogative. At least, I would be hugely disappointed if that were to happen.</p>
<p>-James Sexton</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacques McKenzie</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11050</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacques McKenzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:51:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/the-most-important-cases-of-this-term/#comment-11050</guid>
		<description>Hein.
As for Medellin, the Court should take more cases and Medellin should be taken up this Term.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hein.</p>
<p>As for Medellin, the Court should take more cases and Medellin should be taken up this Term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

