We have changed our round-up format!  In an effort to simplify the process for our round-up team, going forward we will only include in the round-up news articles and posts that are submitted to us.  If you have (or know of) an article or post that you would like to have included in the round-up, please send a link to roundup [at] scotusblog.com so that we can consider it. 

Briefly:

  • At The Volokh Conspiracy, Jonathan Adler weighs in on Adam Liptak’s article in The New York Times (which Marissa covered in yesterday’s round-up), reporting on a study which characterized the Roberts Court as particularly friendly to business interests. He analyzes the study cited in the article and argues that, “[u]ltimately, if one wants to know whether the Court is more or less friendly to business (or any other interest) one should look at the doctrinal result of the Court’s decisions.”
  • At Dorf on Law, Mike Dorf uses the Court’s recent order dismissing as improvidently granted Boyer v. Louisiana, a speedy trial challenge against the state, as an opportunity to reconsider the “rule of four” – the Court’s longstanding practice of requiring the affirmative vote of at least four of the nine Justices to grant review.
  • Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports on recently discovered documents showing that the Court in 1956 agreed to relocate to Asheville, North Carolina, in the event of a nuclear attack on Washington, D.C.

Posted in Round-up

Recommended Citation: Sarah Erickson-Muschko, Tuesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (May. 7, 2013, 8:51 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/05/tuesday-round-up-172/