Round-Up

In today’s Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and Mark H. Anderson report here (subscription req’d) on the yesterday’s unanimous opinions in four business cases.

Washington Post Staff Writer Charles Lane has this article on the Court’s decision to hear Kimbrough v. U.S., No. 06-6330; Linda Greenhouse reports here in today’s New York Times; at the BLT, Emma Schwartz weighs in here on the federal crack sentencing case; the AP’s Mark Sherman reports here; in today’s LA Times, David Savage has this story; and Doug Berman weighs in here and here on the Court’s grants in both the Kimbrough and Gall sentencing cases.

At Crime & Consequences, Kent Schiedegger has this post on the Court’s decision in Fry v. Pliler, No. 06-5247. Mark H. Anderson of Dow Jones Newswires reports here at CNN Money on the ruling in U.S. v. Atlantic Research, No. 06-562, allowing a unit of Sequa Corp. to recover Superfund cleanup costs from the federal government; Mark A. Hoffman has this story at Business Insurance.

Matt Brady of the National Underwriter Washington News Service reports here on the Court’s opinion in Beck v. Pace International Union, No. 05-1448; Pensions & Investments has this article; Paul Secunda weighs in here at the Workplace Prof Blog on the decision, in which “the Court reached unanimity … by turning this complex ERISA question into an easier one of Chevron deference under administrative law.”

Secunda has this post on the Long Island Care at Home ruling, “a sweeping victory for the Department of Labor and the employer and an equally devastating loss to Coke” at the Workplace Prof Blog; Steven Greenhouse reports here for the New York Times on the decision, which “upheld federal regulations that exempt most home care workers from minimum-wage and overtime protections”; in today’s LA Times, Savage has this article on the justices’ unanimous opinion, which “could trigger a move in Congress to amend the law”; Robert Barnes reports here in the Washington Post.

At Justice Talking, Alabama Law Professor Bryan Fair has this post on the forthcoming opinion in the Louisiville & Seattle school cases, in which he believes it is “more likely that this Court will equate these modern desegregation policies with former segregation policies, turning the Equal Protection Clause against the children it was supposed to help.”

This post from the WSJ.com Informed Reader blog discusses this article (subscription req’d) by Jeffrey Rosen in the New Republic on Justice Kennedy’s voting patterns and his desire for moral consensus.

Lastly, Siobhan Hughes reports here (subscription req’d) in the Wall Street Journal that the Justice Department refrained from filing an amicus brief in Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta and Motorola, No. 06-43, despite a request from the SEC to file in support of investors, “exposing disagreement within the government over how the court should rule in a case that may have implications for investors in Enron Corp.” Peter Lattman has these thoughts on the “cliffhanger” at the WSJ.com Law Blog; Carrie Johnson has this report in today’s Washington Post.