Wednesday round-up

The Court yesterday released its first opinion in an argued case this Term, deciding unanimously inUnited States v. Bormesthat the Little Tucker Act does not waive the sovereign immunity of the United States for damages actions under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Lyle has further details forthis blog, while Jesse J. Holland of theAssociated Pressand Jonathan Stempel ofReutersalso have reports on the decision.

The Court also pushed back its consideration of several cert petitions involving same-sex marriage, including challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act and to California’s Proposition 8, to its November 30 conference. Lyle has coverage forthis blog, while Chris Geidner ofBuzzfeedand Howard Mintz ofMercury Newsalso have coverage.

The Court also denied cert inNix v. Holder, a challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Lyle has coverage forthis blog, and Rick Hasen comments on the decision over at theElection Law Blog. The Court granted cert last week in a similar challenge,Shelby County v. Holder. At the Concurring Opinions blog, Ronald Krotoszynski argues that on the Voting Rights Act, “Congress has punted important questions that will force federal courts to ask and answer questions that many federal judges would rather avoid,” while Rick Hasen re-posts a 2005 Washington Post op-ed at theElection Law Blogin which he argues that he “would not count on” Chief Justice Roberts to uphold the Act. And at theNational Law Journal, Tony Mauro notes that the Court slightly tweaked the question presented in Shelby County when it granted cert. (subscription required).

The Court also denied cert inShaygan v. United States, a challenge to an Eleventh Circuit decision throwing out a $600,000 award against prosecutors for misconduct. Terry Baynes ofReutershas coverage, as does theAssociated Press.

Briefly:

• Cass Sunstein has a column forBloomberg Viewarguing that in light of changes in public opinion, the case for judicial caution in the same-sex marriage cases “becomes weaker every day.”
• In his column forThomson Reuters News and Insight, Reynolds Holdings argues that President Obama’s “best shot at a legal legacy doesn’t lie with the highest court in the land,” and that he should instead focus on lower-court appointments.
• David Ovalle of theMiami Heraldreports on Florida’s efforts to implement the Court’s holding inMiller v. Alabama banning mandatory sentences of life without parole for juvenile offenders. Douglas A. Berman comments on the piece over at theSentencing Law and Policy Blog.
• Michael Ramsay of theOriginalism Blogargues that Noah Feldman’s recentBloomberg Viewcolumn on same-sex marriage and marijuana (covered in Kiran’sround-upyesterday) misstates the healthcare case’s reasoning in a way that suggests that “its commerce clause conclusion may be forgotten, or at least obscured.”
• Stephen Wermiel has anew postin this blogs “SCOTUS for law students” series, discussing the rise of the specialized Supreme Court bar.
• At theSentencing Law and Policy Blog, Douglas A. Berman comments on “an interesting exchange of opinions” on a stay of execution in yesterday’sorder listthat Tom highlighted in this blog’slive blog of opinions.