Breaking News

Monday round-up


  • At her eponymous blog, Amy Howe introduces a series of posts looking at petitions distributed for the justices’ next conference in September. 
  • At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie discusses Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, in which the justices have once again been asked to consider whether public-sector unions may require non-members to pay fees to cover certain union costs.
  • At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman examines new data from this past term concerning the size of the majority across different types of cases, the length of time between oral argument and when the justices release their opinions, and differences in the justices’ voting relationships with one another.
  • At the International Municipal Lawyer Association’s Appellate Practice Blog, Lisa Soronen discusses the State and Local Legal Center’s amicus brief in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, in which the Supreme Court will consider Ohio’s maintenance of its voter rolls under the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act.
  • In an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, Rick Hasen argues that “cheap speech, despite its undeniable benefits, has come with a steep price for our democracy,” and “a new conservative Supreme Court is more likely to make things worse than better.”
  • The Daily Journal’s podcast features a discussion of the Supreme Court’s past term with Kedar Bhatia, the producer of this blog’s annual Stat Pack.

Recommended Citation: Andrew Hamm, Monday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Aug. 21, 2017, 10:08 AM),