Breaking News

Monday round-up

Tomorrow’s arguments in the challenges to state bans on same-sex marriage dominate coverage of and commentary on the Court.  At this blog, Lyle Denniston outlined the “decisive questions” to watch tomorrow, with other coverage coming from NPR’s Nina Totenberg, who looks at same-sex marriage in the Justices’ own words, Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed, Marcia Coyle and Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal (subscription required), Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal,

In a podcast for NPR, Totenberg, Mara Liasson, and SCOTUSblog’s Tom Goldstein discuss “the legal questions before the Court and seismic shift in the culture and politics on this issue.”  And in The New York Times, Sheryl Gay Stolberg reports on how the case of Jim Obergefell, one of the plaintiffs in the Ohio challenge, “has become the measure of something else entirely: how far the gay rights movement has come in one of the most traditionally conservative corners of the Midwest.” 

Commentary comes from Leslie Griffin at Hamilton and Griffin on Rights, David Gans at the Detroit Free Press, Gene Schaerr at the National Review’s Bench Memos and The Daily Signal, Dawn Stefanowicz at The Public Discourse, Patrick Fagan at The Stream, and Kenneth Jost at Jost on Justice.  Elizabeth Wydra and Ryan Anderson discuss the same-sex marriage cases at Fox News (video), while Tom Watts has the first part of a preview of the oral argument at the Harvard Law and Policy Review.


  • At ISCOTUSnow, Edward Lee predicts the winner in last month’s Clean Air Act cases based on the number of questions for both sides.
  • At the Health Affairs Blog, Timothy Jost discusses efforts by Republican senators to introduce “transition plans” to deal with a decision by the Court striking down the availability of tax subsidies for individuals who purchase their health insurance on an exchange operated by the federal government.
  • The Constitutional Accountability Center continues its series on the Roberts Court at ten with a post by Brianne Gorod on the Fourth Amendment.
  • In the Gainesville Times, Cindy Swirko reports that, although “local law enforcement officers say a U.S. Supreme Court ruling limiting the use of police dogs in traffic stop searches will have little effect, a defense attorney who often represents people in dog-related cases said it will make a difference.”
  • At Concurring Opinions,” Edward Zelinsky urges the Court to grant cert. in Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. and “correct the basics of ERISA preemption.”

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]

Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Monday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Apr. 27, 2015, 6:42 AM),