Monday round-up

With the Court set to hear arguments this week in two of the Term’s most anticipated cases – United States v. Jones and M.B.Z. v. Clinton – today’s clippings focus on the week ahead.

Lyle Denniston of this blog previews the Jones case, in which the Court will consider the constitutionality of the government’s warrantless use of GPS tracking devices. Reuters and the Washington Examiner also have coverage.  In her preview of the case for the Los Angeles Times, Carol Williams takes a broader look at technology and the Fourth Amendment – an issue also addressed by the editorial board of the New York Times, which urges the Court to “think[] differently about reasonable expectations of privacy” in light of powerful modern technologies. Finally, at the Volokh Conspiracy, Orin Kerr posts a video of his recent panel on this case at William & Mary.

David Savage of the Los Angeles Times and NPR’s Nina Totenberg preview today’s oral argument in the M.B.Z. case, in which the Court will consider the balance of power between the executive branch and Congress in the context of the Middle East peace process.  Mark Sherman of the Associated Press and Harriet Robbins Ost of UPI also preview the case, as does Steven Schwinn at the Constitutional Law Prof Blog. The Huffington Post’s Mike Sacks has brief previews of both M.B.Z. and Jones.

This blog’s Lyle Denniston and the New Orleans Times-Picayune preview tomorrow’s oral argument in Smith v. Cain, in which the Court will consider another legal challenge to prosecutorial conduct in the New Orleans D.A.’s office.

Briefly:

Posted in: Round-up

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY