on Feb 14, 2013 at 9:18 am
Yesterday’s coverage focused on previewing the remainder of the Term. Ariane de Vogue of ABC News observes that we are currently in the “quiet before the storm,” with the Court “poised for a major decision on affirmative action, as well as block buster arguments on the Voting Rights Act in February and gay marriage in March,” while a panel discussion at the Washington Legal Foundation noted “how many of the cases the Court will address in the coming months are ‘follow-on’ cases from recent past Supreme Court decisions.” (Hat tip: Howard Bashman.) Peter Krouse of The Plain Dealer reports on a talk by Jonathan Adler in which he discussed the same-sex marriage cases and the challenge to race-based affirmative action in public universities in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin.
Other coverage focused on specific cases. In his Verdict column for Justia, Vikram David Amar analyzes the issue of the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG)’s standing in United States v. Windsor, the challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act; he concludes that the Court might use the standing issue to “defer these cases and avoid issuing dispositive rulings on the merits using the flexible justiciability doctrine.” For this blog, Marty Lederman looks at the significance of the amicus briefs opposing same-sex marriage in Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry, the challenge to California’s Proposition 8.
- Looking ahead to this month’s oral arguments in Shelby County and Maryland v. King, in which the Court will consider whether states may collect and analyze DNA from people arrested and charged with serious crimes, C-SPAN Radio will rebroadcast audio of oral arguments from historic cases relevant to each issue. The broadcasts will take place from February 18 – 22, at 8 p.m. ET.
- Part three of SCOTUSblog’s interview with Linda Greenhouse, in which she discusses the role of Supreme Court reporters, is now available online.
- Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports on Tuesday’s talk by Justice Scalia, moderated by Nina Totenberg of NPR, in which he explained that he was not attending that evening’s State of the Union address because “[i]t has turned into a childish spectacle. I don’t want to be there to lend dignity to it.” Meanwhile, Tony Mauro of the Blog of Legal Times notes that six Justices did attend the State of the Union.
- For romantically inclined Court-watchers, the Georgetown Law Weekly has produced a series of Supreme Court Valentines.
- In The Atlantic, Andrew Cohen discusses the case of Georgia death-row inmate Warren Hill, who is scheduled to be executed next week. He argues that “what Georgia — and other states — have done since” the Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia “is deny men like Hill (and Marvin Wilson, executed last summer in Texas despite an IQ of 61) the remedy they deserve.”