There is still more coverage and commentary relating to the death of Justice Antonin Scalia and the battle over his successor. David Savage and Maura Dolan of the Los Angeles Times profile potential nominee Paul Watford, while coverage focusing on efforts to support or oppose the eventual nominee come from Robin Bravender of Energy & Environment Daily, Dave Boyer of The Washington Times, and Josh Lederman of the Associated Press.

At his Election Law Blog, Rick Hasen argues that “[s]howing that thousands of people care about this issue and are willing to go to the streets will show enthusiasm over this issue and Senators will pay a political price for denying even a hearing to the nominee of a president who was elected twice by the American people.” At the Maryland Appellate Blog, Steve Klepper urges Chief Justice John Roberts to step in “to try to defuse the standoff before the situation spirals further downward.”  And in his column for The Atlantic, Garrett Epps cautions that the “current senatorial tantrum is motivated neither by democratic spirit nor by love of the people, but by pure hatred of a president whose very existence is a stench in Republican nostrils. Giving in to that spite will set a precedent that may ill serve the nation for generations.”

At Hamilton and Griffin on Rights, law student Samantha Millar looks back at the oral argument in Nichols v. United States, concluding that “the Justices seemed skeptical of the government’s interpretation of SORNA, with many reluctant to accord it much weight and at least one seemingly outright objecting to it.”  And in its weekly Supreme Court podcast, the Christian news agency The World & Everything In It reviews the oral arguments in both Nichols and Voisine v. United States.

Briefly:

  • In his column for Bloomberg View, Noah Feldman urges the Court to grant review in a case asking the Justices to decide “whether it’s constitutional for Congress to deny birthright citizenship to people born in American Samoa, which has been a U.S. territory since 1900.”
  • In an op-ed for Newsweek, Frederick Mark Gedicks looks ahead to next week’s argument in Zubik v. Burwell, arguing that “Congressional purpose, Supreme Court precedent and the rule of law all compel denial of the RFRA exemptions sought by the Little Sisters and the other Zubik claimants.”
  • The Supreme Court Mapping Project hosts a sortable table of this Term’s cases.

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.

Posted in Round-up

Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Tuesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 15, 2016, 9:07 AM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2016/03/tuesday-round-up-317/