on May 6, 2011 at 9:22 am
At Prawfsblawg, Aaron Bruhl discusses the Courtâ€™s recent decision in AT&T Mobility v. Conception. He suggests that the case might have turned out differently if it arose in a state, rather than federal, court, reasoning that â€œJustice Thomas believes that the FAA does not apply in state courts, and he has continued to adhere to this view despite multiple precedents to the contrary.â€ New Orleans City Business BlogÂ also has coverage of the decision, including promises by members of Congress to reintroduce legislation intended to protect consumers.
In an opinion piece for the Los Angeles Times (via the Bellingham Herald) Tamar Birckhead discusses J.D.B. v. North Carolina, which was argued in March. At issue in the case is whether courts should consider a juvenile suspectâ€™s age to determine whether he is â€œin custodyâ€ and therefore entitled to a Miranda warning. Birckhead concludes that â€œif we want to elicit accurate, reliable information from criminal suspects, and if we want to stanch the flow of false confessions, we must get beyond our single-minded focus on the Miranda warning.â€
With the Court having denied cert. before judgment in Virginia v. Sebelius last month, on Tuesday, the Fourth Circuit will become the first court of appeals to hear oral arguments in cases challenging the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal will argue on behalf of the United States in Richmond. Joan Biskupic at USA TodayÂ has more details.
At theÂ Â CockleBur, Shon Hopwood discusses the logistics for filing a reply brief at the cert. stage.
At the National Law JournalÂ (subscription required), Tony Mauro covers the dispute over the renovation of the Court building, which has significantly exceeded the estimated labor costs.