Friday round-up
on Feb 21, 2014 at 11:26 am
Briefly:
- In The New York Times, Adam Liptak previews next week’s oral arguments in the greenhouse gas cases, observing that in the process of deciding “whether the Obama administration went too far in trying to regulate emissions from stationary sources like power plants,” the Justices “are likely to weigh in on a central Republican critique of Mr. Obama: that he is misusing his executive authority.”
- At The Federalist, Ryan Rodenberg summarizes the facts and issues in a petition for certiorari filed earlier this month by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who has asked the Court to weigh in on whether his state can allow regulated sports gambling.
- Writing for Cronkite News, Whitney Ogden reports on Ryan v. Hurles, an Arizona habeas case on today’s Conference that has been relisted twelve times since October.
- At ACSblog, John Blume weighs in on Hall v. Florida, in which the Court will consider whether Florida’s scheme for determining whether an inmate is intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for the death penalty is consistent with its 2002 decision in Atkins v. Virginia.
- At the Constitutional Accountability Center’s Text and History Blog, David H. Gans responds to Douglas Laycock’s post for this blog as part of our symposium on the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
- In the first installment of his new column for The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin looks back at the decision by then-U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker striking down California’s ban on same-sex marriage, noting that although the Supreme Court later “chose to speak on gay marriage through a narrower case, ruling only that the federal government must recognize marriages solemnized under state law,” since then the lower courts “have been reading the [United States v.] Windsor case as if it upheld Judge Walker’s once-shunned opinion.”
