Breaking News

Wednesday round-up

Much of today’s Court-related coverage and commentary focuses on the challenge to Texas abortion regulations, in which the Court will hear oral arguments this morning.  Coverage comes from David Savage of the Los Angeles Times, Lawrence Hurley of Reuters, Erik Eckholm of The New York Times (who focuses on the lawyers in the case), Adam Liptak of The New York Times (who focuses on the amicus briefs), and Kelsey Ferguson and Samantha Ostrom for Cornell’s Legal Information Institute.

Commentary comes from the editorial boards of USA Today and The Washington Post, as well as Mark DeFrancesco of The Hill, Noah Feldman of Bloomberg View, Casey Mattox at The Federalist, and Steven Mazie of The Economist.  

The death of Justice Antonin Scalia and the possible confirmation battle ahead continue to draw coverage and commentary.  Mark Walsh reported on yesterday’s memorial service for the Justice for this blog; other coverage comes from Richard Wolf of USA Today.  Discussing the nomination battle at Liberty Blog, Todd Gaziano contends that, “[w]hatever the political branches do, however, let’s hope that tactic is not rewarded with something as important as a life-time Supreme Court appointment.”  At Dorf on Law, Eric Segall responds to a post by Senator Chuck Grassley for this blog, arguing that the “myth that there are two different types of Supreme Court Justices and that the American people should be allowed to ‘choose’ the one they want by voting in the next election is unsupportable.”

Coverage of Monday’s oral arguments, at which Justice Clarence Thomas ended a decade-long period in which he did not ask any questions, comes from NPR’s Nina Totenberg, Robert Barnes of The Washington Post, and Dylan Matthews of Vox.

Yesterday the Justices issued two opinions, both of which were decided by a vote of six to two:  Lockhart v. United States and Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.  Evan Lee covered the decision in Lockhart for this blog, with commentary from Noah Feldman for Bloomberg View.  Daniel Fisher discusses the decision in Gobeille at Forbes. Josh Gerstein discusses both cases at Politico.

I covered yesterday’s oral arguments in the bankruptcy-fraud case Husky International Electronics v. Ritz for this blog, with other coverage coming from Danielle Blevins of Talk Media News.  Blevins also covered the other oral argument yesterday, in the sex-offender-registration case Nichols v. United States.


  • At Bloomberg View, Noah Feldman calls for more transparency at the Court, including with respect to conflicts of interest.

Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Wednesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 2, 2016, 12:10 AM),