on Oct 28, 2014 at 6:31 am
- At The Huffington Post, Zach Carter reports on recent comments by Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who in an interview over the weekend argued that, if Democrats lose their Senate majority in the midterm elections, the Supreme Court could block Democratic policy initiatives for years to come.
- In The New York Times, Adam Liptak covers the weekend appearance at Yale Law School by Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, and Samuel Alito, all of whom graduated from the school.
- And in his Sidebar column, Liptak discusses the Court’s recent orders in cases involving, for example, same-sex marriage and voter identification, noting that “[j]udges and lawyers who used to have to try to make sense of endless, opaque opinions now have to divine what theSupreme Court’s silence means.”
- At Balkinization, Brianne Gorod weighs in on King v. Burwell, the challenge to the availability of federal tax subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance on an exchange operated by the federal government. She contends that, although “[p]eople following these challenges will no doubt be waiting for the Court’s decision with bated breath, . . . there shouldn’t be much suspense. If the Court follows its usual practices and procedures, it won’t grant review.”
- At UCLA Law Review’s Discourse, Joshua Teitelbaum analyzes last Term’s decision in Navarette v. California, in which the Court held that a traffic stop prompted by an anonymous but reliable tip to 911 complied with the Fourth Amendment because the officer had reasonable suspicion that the truck’s driver was intoxicated, using probabilistic reasoning.
- At Hamilton and Griffin on Rights, Leslie Griffin and Marci Hamilton list their “top ten” objections to the regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services in the wake of last Term’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby.
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] scotusblog.com.