Friday round-up
on May 6, 2016 at 8:08 am
Coverage relating to the nomination of Chief Judge Merrick Garland to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia comes from Tony Mauro, who in The National Law Journal (subscription or registration may be required) reports that eight “former U.S. solicitors general from Democratic and Republican administrations, most of whom are now prominent private practitioners, are publicly endorsing Judge Merrick Garland’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.” In The Huffington Post, Cristian Farias reports on comments by retired Justice John Paul Stevens, who yesterday urged the Senate to “‘[g]o ahead and hold a hearing’ on Judge Merrick Garland.” In The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that a “report by Congress’s nonpartisan research arm suggests U.S. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland would be a pragmatic voice if confirmed to the Supreme Court, scoring fewer ideological points and securing more victories than the outspoken conservative he would succeed, the late Justice Antonin Scalia.” In The Des Moines Register, Brianne Pfannenstiel reports that “U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said Wednesday he thinks Donald Trump, now the presumptive Republican nominee for president, would nominate the ‘right type of people’ to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Commentary on the nomination battle comes from Jonathan Chait, who in New York observes that “[r]hetorically distancing themselves from Trump is no longer a possibility” for Senate Republicans. At Vox, Matthew Yglesias similarly suggests that a “raft of GOP senators standing for reelection in blue or purple states are going to find that they are in a very uncomfortable situation thanks to a trap Majority Leader Mitch McConnell inadvertently set for them.” In The Economist, Steven Mazie cites the Court’s possible review of the Texas voter identification law as an example of “another potential 4-4 split, a fresh reminder of the missing ninth justice that America’s 45th president will—if the Senate stays true to its word—get to appoint.” And a podcast at Advice and Consent looks at both whether Trump as a nominee helps Garland’s chances of being confirmed and the Robert Bork confirmation hearings.
Briefly:
- In The Washington Post, Mark Berman reports on Justice Stephen Breyer’s dissent from the denial of review in the case of a California death row inmate; Breyer indicated that “California’s death penalty system appears to personify issues he has raised with capital punishment in the United States.”
- Patrick Gregory of Bloomberg BNA reports that, in the wake of the Court’s 2015 decision in Holt v. Hobbs, the Fifth Circuit this week ruled that “Texas can’t stop a Muslim prisoner from growing a four-inch beard and wearing religious headgear under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act” – the same day that the Court declined to weigh in on Alabama’s “short hair” policy for American Indian prisoners.
- The National Immigration Law Center has an explainer on United States v. Texas, the challenge to the Obama administration’s deferred-action policy, including the significance of work authorization.
Remember, we rely exclusively on our readers to send us links for our 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.
