Thursday round-up

AMY HOWE DEC 4, 2014 8:05 AM

Yesterday the Court heard oral argument in Young v. United Parcel Service, in which it is considering whether the shipping company violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act when it rejected a Virginia woman’s request that she be put on “light duty” during her pregnancy.  Lyle Denniston covered the oral argument for this blog; other coverage comes from Nina Totenberg at NPR, Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News (via the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette), and the PBS NewsHour, while ProPublica compiles resources on the case. Commentary comes from Lisa Faye Petak at Hamilton and Griffin on Rights and Steven Mazie at The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, while at Bloomberg View Noah Feldman weighs in on yesterday’s second case, Hana Financial v. Hana Bank, in which the Court is considering “the fascinating question of whether a trademark should count if it originates in a foreign language.”  And at ISCOTUSnow, Edward Lee predicts the winners of both of yesterday’s oral arguments based on the number of questions asked by the Justices.

Monday’s oral argument in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, in which the Court is considering whether an agency must engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking before it can significantly alter an interpretative rule, also garnered coverage and commentary.  Brian Wolfman and Bradley Girard covered the oral argument for this blog, while Leland Beck weighed in at Federal Regulations Advisor.

Briefly:

• In The National Law Journal’s Supreme Court Brief, Tony Mauro reviews Supreme Ambitions, a new novel by David Lat, describing it as “a thriller that captures the law clerk experience masterfully, with all its intensity, competitiveness, big-bucks allure and prestige.”
• In The California Lawyer, Zachary Price reviews Uncertain Justice, the “accessible and erudite” book by Laurence Tribe and Joshua Matz.
• The Constitutional Accountability Center continues its series on Chief Justice John Roberts in his tenth Term with a post that focuses on women’s issues – specifically, reproductive rights and employment discrimination.
• In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Gabe Roth argues for greater transparency at the Court, contending that it “is time to make the justices more accountable to the American people.”

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.

 

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY