on Feb 9, 2010 at 10:39 am
Joan Biskupic ofÂ USA Today discusses whatÂ Citizens United may portend for the rest of the current Term, in which the Court will hear several â€œmomentousâ€ cases.Â Biskupic opines that the contentiousÂ Citizens decision may have reinforced the Courtâ€™s â€œcaustic ideological divideâ€ as it moves forward in reviewing and deciding pending cases, and in particular other high-profile cases such asÂ McDonald v. City of Chicago,Â Doe No. 1 v. Reed, andÂ Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB.Â Meanwhile, at theÂ Huffington Post, Frances Moore Lappe criticizes the decision as eliminating â€œthe freedom to choose among a range of political candidates far wider than those favored by our societyâ€™s vast concentrations of wealth.â€ Also at the Huffington Post, Chris Weigant discusses how the decision might affect politics â€œout of sight of the viewing public,â€ exploring scenarios in which a corporation could manipulate media airtime or use the threat of election spending to influence pending legislation.Â Finally, atÂ Politico, Jeanne Cummings reports on public opposition to theÂ Citizens United decision and its possible effects for both parties in the upcoming midterm elections.
Adam Liptak ofÂ The New York Times reports on the story of Shon Hopwood, a former bank robber from Nebraska who became a jailhouse lawyer and drafted (among other things) a successful petition for cert. for a fellow inmate inÂ Fellers v. United States.Â Hopwood was released from prison in 2008 and now plans to attend law school.Â Kashmir Hill ofÂ Above the Law and Orin Kerr at theÂ Volokh Conspiracy also have coverage of the â€œjailhouse lawyer of the day.â€
AtÂ Law.com, Daniel Prywes previews City of Ontario v. Quon, in which the Court â€œwill have to determine for the first time the privacy rights of public employees in their electronic communications.â€Â He notes that although the ruling will not explicitly affect the privacy rights of employees in the private sector, it will nonetheless significantly affect private employeesâ€™ common-law privacy rights, which are currently used in court challenges to employers that monitor their employeesâ€™ electronic communication.
Briefly, Ashby Jones at theÂ WSJ Law Blog adds to Jess Bravinâ€™s speculation in theÂ WSJ regarding future Supreme Court appointments (featured in yesterdayâ€™s Round-up).Â TheÂ Boston Globe and theÂ Harvard Crimson report that retired Justice David Souter, who attended both Harvard College (â€™61) and Harvard Law School (â€™66), will deliver the keynote address at the universityâ€™s 2010 commencement.Â Finally, theÂ WSJ Law Blog also covers the argument-sharing controversy inÂ McDonald v. Chicago, asserting that the Court likely chose to grant argument time to the NRA because of the different approaches that the two groups plan to take to arrive at the same conclusion.