WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Monday, April 22

The justices will hear oral argument in City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson and Smith v. Spizzirri this morning. Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Monday morning read:

• Supreme Court weighs Oregon city’s power to punish the homeless (Lawrence Hurley, NBC News)
• The miscarriage was inevitable. Could she have had an ER abortion? Supreme Court to decide (Maureen Groppe, USA Today)
• Homelessness case before US supreme court could have far-reaching effects (Diana Ramirez-Simon, The Guardian) 
• Workplace DEI Worry Shouldn’t Overshadow a Civil Rights Victory (Madeline Meth & Brian Wolfman, Bloomberg Law)
• The Supreme Court Should Rule Swiftly on Trump’s Immunity Claim (Liz Cheney, The New York Times)

Petitions of the week

Kentucky man says police violated Fourth Amendment by searching his backpack during arrest

The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here.

The Fourth Amendment generally bars police from searching people or their property without a warrant. The Supreme Court has made an exception for searches made during an arrest. But although that exception applies to arrestees themselves, it only extends to their nearby possessions if there is a risk they can reach into them to grab a weapon or destroy evidence. This week, we highlight petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether a backpack that is outside the reach of a person in handcuffs falls within the warrant exception.

RELIST WATCH

Ghost guns, six-person juries, and discretionary visa decisions

The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available here.

Between the Feb. 23 conference and the April 12 conference — that’s six conferences — the Supreme Court relisted just one new case. That is a dry spell greater than anything I’ve seen in the more than a decade I’ve been writing this feature.

This week, the court also began clearing out some relists that have been hanging around for a while. The court denied review of nine-time relist Compton v. Texas, involving alleged sex discrimination in juror selection (over the dissent of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson); six-time relist McKesson v. Doe, involving First Amendment limitations on imposing liability on protest organizers (Sotomayor filed this statement respecting the denial); and three-time relist Michaels v. Davis, involving a confession erroneously admitted at a murder trial (over Jackson’s dissent).

WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Friday, April 19

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read:

• DEI ‘lives on’ after Supreme Court ruling, but critics see an opening (Julian Mark, The Washington Post)
• Gun makers urge US Supreme Court to hear appeal in Mexico’s lawsuit (Nate Raymond, Reuters)
• Supreme Court to hear biggest homeless rights case in decades (Claire Thornton, USA Today)
• Blatt to Set Supreme Court Record for Women With 50th Argument (Lydia Wheeler, Bloomberg Law)
• U.S. Supreme Court sides in Richmond veteran in GI benefits case (Charlotte Rene Woods, Richmond Times-Dispatch)

WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Thursday, April 18

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Thursday morning read:

• Supreme Court makes it easier to sue for job discrimination over forced transfers (Mark Sherman, The Associated Press)
• The Supreme Court Asks What Enron Has to Do with January 6th—and Trump (Amy Davidson Sorkin, The New Yorker)
• Will the Supreme Court’s GI Bill ruling mean more money for vets? (Leo Shane III, Military Times)
• The Gaping Hole In Supreme Court Rules For Tracking Links Between Litigants And Influence Groups (Shawn Musgrave, The Intercept)
• Fetal Personhood Fight Underlies Supreme Court Abortion Case (Lydia Wheeler, Bloomberg Law)