Details on today’s orders and opinions
In this morning’s orders the Court granted two new cases and denied – among others – all seven of the detainee cases. (Lyle ‘s post on those denials is here.) The Court also issued one opinion in an argued case and one summary ruling. It did not call for the views of the Solicitor General in any new cases.
Justice Thomas wrote the opinion for the Court in Elgin v. Department of Treasury. By a vote of six to three, the Court affirmed the decision of the First Circuit. It held that the Civil Service Reform Act, which established a “comprehensive system for reviewing personnel action taken against federal employees,” provides the exclusive avenue to judicial review when a qualifying employee challenges an adverse employment action by arguing that a federal statute is unconstitutional. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Ginsburg and Kagan.
The Court also issued a summary opinion in Parker v. Matthews. In that case, it held that the decision of Sixth Circuit, which set aside two twenty-nine-year-old murder convictions, is a textbook example of what the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) proscribes: “using federal habeas corpus review as a vehicle to second-guess the reasonable decisions of state courts.”
Issue(s): (1) Whether, in a misrepresentation case under Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, the district court must require proof of materiality before certifying a plaintiff class based on the fraud-on-the-market theory; and (2) whether, in such a case, the district court must allow the defendant to present evidence rebutting the applicability of the fraud-on-the-market theory before certifying a plaintiff class based on that theory.
Certiorari stage documents:
- Opinion below (9th Cir.)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition
- Amicus brief of Former SEC Commissioners et al.
- Amicus brief of Washington Legal Foundation and Allied Educational Foundation
- Amicus brief of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
- Reply of petitioners
- Letter and attachment of respondent
- Letter of petitioners in response
Evans v. Michigan (Granted )
Issue(s): Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial after the trial judge erroneously holds a particular fact to be an element of the offense and then grants a midtrial directed verdict of acquittal because the prosecution failed to prove that fact.
Certiorari stage documents:
Recommended Citation: Kali Borkoski, Details on today’s orders and opinions, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 11, 2012, 10:55 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/details-on-todays-orders-and-opinions-8/