on Oct 20, 2017 at 6:53 am
- Subscript offers a graphic explainer on Wilson v. Sellers, which asks whether a federal court in a habeas case should “look through” a summary state-court ruling to review the last reasoned state-court decision.
- At The Federalist, Margot Cleveland suggests that this week’s most significant Supreme Court order concerned an administrative-law case the justices’ didn’t take, and that “Monday’s order in Scenic America [v. Department of Transportation] provides the first evidence that [Justice Neil] Gorsuch intends to challenge Chevron deference and that he possesses the gravitas necessary to sway his colleagues.”
- At The American Prospect, Dorothy Samuels weighs in on Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in which the court will decide whether the First Amendment bars Colorado from requiring a baker to create a cake for a same-sex wedding, arguing that “[g]ranting business owners exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on their religious beliefs would be a radical development, extending a new constitutional right.”
- At SportsHandle, Brett Smiley looks at the NCAA’s brief in the New Jersey sports-betting case, Christie v. National Collegiate Athletic Association.
- At The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Erin Mulvaney reports that the acting chairwoman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Wednesday that “[t]he U.S. Supreme Court should resolve questions about the scope of sexual orientation protection in the workplace,” an issue presented by the pending cert petition in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital.
- At the Associated Press, Emily Wagster Pettus reports that in a recent Supreme Court brief opposing cert,“[a]ttorneys for the Mississippi governor say two levels of federal courts have been correct in blocking a lawsuit that challenges the Confederate battle emblem on the state flag,” and that the plaintiff in the case “has failed to show he suffered harm because of the flag.”
- In an op-ed for The New York Times, John Pfaff suggests ways of improving the Supreme Court’s ability to evaluate empirical evidence.
- The Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast features a discussion of “recent speeches by Kagan and Sotomayor, a few cases the Court declined to hear, and a new book about the Notorious RBG’s workout routine.”
We rely 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, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!