Yesterday was the kind of day that we’d been waiting for here at SCOTUSblog, with the Court issuing opinions in three argued cases, two of which were the blockbusters American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo and Riley v. California. Thomas Hopson canvassed the initial coverage of both decisions in our evening round-up. Steven Mazie covers both cases for The Economist.
Additional coverage of the decision in Riley, in which the Court held that police – as a general rule – must obtain a warrant to search the contents of an arrestee’s cellphone, comes from Nina Totenberg of NPR and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal. In USA Today, Richard Wolf reports on the role of Stanford law students in the case. Commentary on the decision comes from Susan Freiwald at ACSblog, Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times, and Yishai Schwartz in The New Republic.
Additional coverage of the decision in Aereo, in which the Court held that the Internet television start-up had violated the Copyright Act by streaming live broadcasts over the Internet to its subscribers, comes from Richard Wolf of USA Today and Pete Williams of NBC News.
In the third opinion yesterday, Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, the Court held that fiduciaries of employee stock ownership programs are subject to the same duty of prudence that applies to ERISA fiduciaries in general, except that they are not required to diversify the ESOP’s assets. Timothy Simeone provided our coverage of the decision, with other coverage coming from Jaclyn Belczyk of JURIST. Commentary comes from Noah Feldman for Bloomberg View, Hera Arsen at the Ogletree Deakins blog, Daniel Fisher of Forbes, and Brian Netter and Reginald Goeke for Mayer Brown’s Class Defense blog.
In other news, yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit struck down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage, paving the way for the issue to reach the Supreme Court. Coverage of that decision comes from Lyle Denniston of this blog; other coverage related to the Court comes from Nina Totenberg of NPR, Richard Wolf of USA Today, and Bill Mears of CNN. Commentary comes from Rick Hasen at his Election Law Blog.
Commentary on Monday’s decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, in which the Court largely upheld the EPA’s power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources, continues with op-eds from the editorial boards of the Miami Herald, the Kansas City Star, the Charlotte Observer, and the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel and from Alexandra Hamilton at RegBlog.
- In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Laurence Tribe discusses the cases that the Court has not yet decided.
- Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that the Court “is on track to at least partly dispel the impression that it’s pro-business.”
- In an op-ed for The Washington Post, Doug Kendall and Brianne Gorod argue that the Court is “less conservative than you think.”
- At the Ogletree Deakins blog, Hera Arsen anticipates the Court’s decision – expected in the next few days – in Harris v. Quinn.
- In the National Review Online, C. Dean McGrath urges the Court to grant review in Arab Bank v. Linde, a case scheduled for today’s Conference in which the Justices are asked to weigh in on a U.S. court’s authority to punish a foreign bank that fails to turn over financial records protected by foreign financial secrecy laws.
[Disclosure: Ronald Mann, a frequent contributor to this blog, was among the counsel to the respondents in Fifth Third Bancorp. However, Mr. Mann was not involved in our coverage of the case.]
A friendly reminder: We rely on our readers to send us links for the round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, or op-ed relating to the Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!
Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Thursday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 26, 2014, 6:56 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/thursday-round-up-234/