Monday round-up

Today is the first day of the December sitting, and the Court will hear oral arguments in two cases.  The George Washington Law Review’s “On the Docket” previews all of the December cases.  Rory Little previewed Mussachio v. United States, in which the Court will consider two issues relating to federal computer crimes, for this blog; I did the same for Green v. Brennan, in which the Justices will consider when the filing period begins to run for a federal employee who is alleging that he was constructively discharged.  Commentary on Green comes from Scott Oswald, who at the Whistleblower Law Blog contends that, if the Tenth Circuit’s ruling is allowed to stand, “it will become far too easy to deprive federal workers of their day in court.”

On Wednesday the Justices will hear oral argument in Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, in which they will consider whether ERISA preempts a state law that requires “all payer” health care databases.  Ronald Mann previewed the case for this blog, while in The New England Journal of Medicine Nicholas Bagley and Christopher Koller argue that the case “threatens to cripple these databases and other state initiatives that aim to improve the health care system.”

Next week the Court will hear oral arguments in some of the higher-profile cases of the Term.  In The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Tony Mauro looks ahead to Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the challenge to the university’s consideration of race in its undergraduate admissions process, and concludes that “it will mostly—but not totally—be a case of déjà vu all over again.” In the Los Angeles Times, David Savage reports that university officials are “struggling to explain a policy that gives an extra edge to Latino and African American students from middle-class households and top-performing high schools.”

Other coverage and commentary focus on the challenge by twenty-six states to the Obama administration’s immigration policy and the federal government’s petition seeking review of a lower court decision putting the policy on hold.  In USA Today, Richard Wolf has an overview of the case and some of the undocumented immigrants who could be affected by the policy, while in The Wall Street Journal Jess Bravin reports on the states’ request for more time to respond to the government’s petition.  And at Balkinization, Marty Lederman contends that “the Court should set argument in the case this Term, and decide it by the end of June 2016, for a very practical reason–one that can be seen clearly by considering the two principal, possible dispositions of the case.”

Briefly:

If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) news 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.

Posted in: Round-up

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY