This week on the Wiki
![](http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/headshots/anna-christensen.jpg)
on Jun 6, 2010 at 10:19 am
Following a busy day at the Court on Tuesday, we have updated our sister site, SCOTUSwiki, to reflect the five new opinions that were handed down. To the case pages for Berghuis v. Thompkins, in which the Court clarified the rights of a suspect under Miranda, and Samantar v. Yousuf, in which the Justices held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act did not shield a former Somali official from suit, we have added links to the opinions, as well as commentary on each ruling by SCOTUSblog’s Lyle Denniston. [Disclosure: Akin Gump and Howe & Russell represented the respondents in Yousuf.] The case page for Alabama v. North Carolina, an original jurisdiction dispute over the disposal of radioactive waste, now includes a link to the decision and a recap by Stanford Law School’s Vivian Wang, the page for Levin v. Commerce Energy has been updated to include the opinion and a recap by Stanford’s Annasara Purcell, and we have also updated the page for Carr v. United States to include the decision and a recap by Will Edelman, also from Stanford.
In addition, the Court issued one order on Tuesday – a cert. grant in Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research v. United States – and we have created a new page on SCOTUSwiki for that case. New amicus briefs were also filed this week in two cases scheduled for oral argument in the 2010 Term – Bruesewitz v. Wyeth and Snyder v. Phelps – and we have added links to those briefs to the Wiki pages for those two cases.
On Tuesday evening, we published a new “Petitions to Watch†post on the blog, and we have added that post to our “Petitions to Watch†list on the Wiki. Finally, as we do every week, we have continued to add media and blogosphere commentary on Elena Kagan’s nomination to our record of nomination coverage. We have also continued to update individual case pages to include links to newly published commentary; this week, a great deal of the media’s attention focused on the Court’s ruling in Berghuis.