Breaking News

Tuesday round-up

Recent coverage related to the Court focuses on the release by the Department of Health and Human Services of new proposed regulations intended to comply with the Court’s June 30 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, as well as an interim final rule for non-profit religious groups in the wake of the Court’s July 3 order in a case involving Wheaton College.  Lyle Denniston covered the release for this blog; commentary and analysis come from Marty Lederman at Balkinization, Molly Duane at Hamilton and Griffin on Rights, Leland Beck at Federal Regulations Advisor, and Steven Mazie at The Economist’s Democracy in America blog.


  • At Re’s Judicata, Richard Re notes that “a significant chunk of the briefing” in Heien v. North Carolina, in which the Court will consider whether a police officer’s mistake of law can provide the individualized suspicion that the Fourth Amendment requires to justify a traffic stop,  “revolves around founding-era customs law.”  “That history,” he contends, “provides a fascinating point of comparison for current law and practice.”
  • In The Atlantic, Garrett Epps argues that Justice Antonin Scalia’s 2013 dissent in United States v. Windsor, in which the Court struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, was not only “his most influential opinion of the term, doing its work in the lower courts,” but it also “may be remembered as the most influential opinion of his career.”
  • At Linked In, Jason Steed previews B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, a trademark case in which the Court will consider how and where, under the Lanham Act, two parties can litigate the question whether one mark is “likely to cause confusion” with another.
  • In a series of posts at the National Review’s Bench Memos, Ed Whelan criticizes comments by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in recent interviews with Marcia Coyle of The National Law Journal.
  • At, Lisa Soronen previews issues in the upcoming Term that may be especially relevant for local governments; she does the same for state governments at the blog of the National Conference of State Legislatures.

A friendly reminder:  We rely on our readers to send us links for the round-up.  If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, or op-ed relating to the Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at]  Until the end of the summer, we will have twice-weekly round-ups (Tuesday and Thursday); daily round-ups will resume in the fall.  Thank you!

[Disclosure: Kevin Russell of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the petitioner in Heien at the cert. stage through the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, but he is not participating in the case at the merits stage.  Russell was also among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of Edith Windsor in Windsor.  However, I am not affiliated with the firm.]

Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Tuesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Aug. 26, 2014, 7:23 AM),