Breaking News

Friday round-up


  • For The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Tony Mauro reports that “[t]he long delay in the court’s decision-making” in Gundy v. United States, which asks whether a provision of the federal sex-offender act violates the nondelegation doctrine, “has been a mystery and a cause for consternation among court-watchers who view the case as a crucial milestone in the effort to shrink the power of federal regulators and bureaucrats.”
  • In an op-ed for The Oakland Press, Alan Loncar regrets the court’s decision last week in Box v. Planned Parenthood not to disturb a lower-court ruling striking down Indiana’s ban on abortions based on the disability, sex or race of the fetus, agreeing with Justice Clarence Thomas that “the Court is ‘dutybound’ to address legalized abortion’s scope.”
  • At The Federalist Society blog, James Phillips explains why the pending cert petition in Kerpen v. Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority “presents an ideal showcase for how the separation of powers protects religious liberty just as much as the First Amendment.”

  • In a letter to the editor of the New York Law Journal (subscription or registration required), Gordon Schnell writes that the recent decision in Cochise Consultancy v. United States, ex rel. Hunt, in which the court held that a longer time limit for filing suit applies to private parties in cases in which the government has not intervened, “provides a unanimous pronouncement by the Supreme Court that both intervened and non-intervened whistleblower cases are treated the same.” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondent in this case.]
  • At the LSE US Centre, Christopher Krewson discusses his recent research on “how judicial speeches shape public support for the Court.”
  • In the latest episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, “Heritage colleague Amy Swearer joins Elizabeth Slattery to highlight recent opinions and orders.”
  • At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman “examines various modes of … participation [by the Office of the Solicitor General] in the Supreme Court at the cert stage for a subset of cases from the OSG under Obama and the OSG under Trump.”

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] Thank you!

Recommended Citation: Edith Roberts, Friday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 7, 2019, 6:50 AM),