Monday round-up

By Amy Howe
on Dec 21, 2015 at 5:58 am

At the National Review’s The Corner, Roger Clegg discusses an op-ed by “a black physicist who is really upset with Chief Justice Roberts” for his comments during oral arguments in the challenge to the University of Texas at Austin’s consideration of race in its undergraduate admissions process.  At ACSblog, David Hinojosa “guarantees that a majority of the Court will not strike down affirmative action,” while Tanya Washington considers remarks by Justice Antonin Scalia and emphasizes that “more important than how his comments are perceived is how they frame the debate about affirmative action and how they will inform the Supreme Court’s decision” in the case.   

Briefly:

• At the Human Rights at Home Blog, Margaret Drew discusses a recent decision in which “a Massachusetts state judge ruled that a Catholic high school discriminated against a gay man when it rescinded a job offer upon learning that the candidate’s spouse is male” and concludes that the “decision is ripe to wend its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
• In his Sidebar column for The New York Times, Adam Liptak reports on the amicus brief filed by a “glittering array of hip-hop stars” in support of a “Mississippi high school student who was disciplined for posting a rap song online.”
• At medium, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy discusses a petition for review filed by chocolate giant Nestlé in a case that “arose when several John Does from Cote D’Ivoire in Africa sued Nestlé for aiding and abetting their enslavement as children,” and she contends that, if “the Supreme Court takes the case and agrees with Nestlé, then these arguments could insulate all multinational corporations from answering for human rights abuses in U.S. courts.”
• At the National Conference of State Legislatures, Lisa Soronen discusses the brief that the State and Local Legal Center filed in a pair of energy cases before the Court, arguing that “Maryland directing its local utilities to enter into a long-term contract providing stable revenue to the successful power plant bidder isn’t field- or conflict-pre-empted.”