on Nov 7, 2013 at 1:06 pm
Yesterday’s coverage of the Court was dominated by the oral argument in Town of Greece v. Galloway, the challenge to a New York town’s practice of having a prayer at the beginning of its town council meetings. Lyle Denniston covered the oral argument for this blog; other coverage comes from Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio, Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal, Mark Walsh of Education Week, William Mears of CNN, and Samuel Franklin of JURIST. Commentary on the case comes from Ruthann Robson at the Constitutional Law Prof Blog.
The Court also heard oral arguments yesterday in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., a case involving the Class Action Fairness Act. Samuel Franklin of JURIST reports on the oral argument, which Archis Parasharami discusses at Mayer Brown’s Class Defense blog.
At Forbes, Daniel Fisher discusses Tuesday’s oral argument in Bond v. United States, a Pennsylvania woman’s challenge to her conviction for violating federal laws prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. At ACSblog, Mark Tushnet discusses the effect that the Court’s decision in Bond could have on business interests.
- Also at Forbes, Fisher covers Monday’s oral argument in Walden v. Fiore, involving personal jurisdiction and venue, and Monday’s denial of certiorari in a challenge to Facebook’s settlement of a class action.
- At the JIPEL Blog, David Yin discusses Tuesday’s oral argument in Medtronic, Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corp.
- The debate over cameras at the Court continues, with the editorial board of The Florida Times-Union throwing its support behind televising the proceedings. As an alternative, the board suggests making audio available via radio, which in its view would “at least bring the court into the 1930s.”
- Last night the Supreme Court Historical Society hosted a lecture on First Amendment case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District; attendees included the brother and sister who were the plaintiffs in the case. Tony Mauro reports for the Blog of Legal Times.
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel to the respondents in this case.]