Monday round-up
Jacqueline Thomsen reports at The Hill that, “[w]ith just two weeks left in the month of June, the justices have yet to issue rulings in 24 cases, including high-profile decisions that will affect the census citizenship question and partisan gerrymandering.” For The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that after “Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. began the Supreme Court’s term last fall seeking to assure the American public that his court does not ‘serve one party or one interest,’” “[h]e will end it playing a pivotal role in two of the most politically consequential decisions the court has made in years.”
Briefly:
- In an episode of Rewire.News’ Boom! Lawyered podcast, Jessica Mason Pieklo and Imani Gandy focus on Department of Commerce v. New York, a challenge to the Trump administration’s decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census.
- Also at Rewire.News, Pieklo writes that last week the justices considered whether to “tak[e]up a case that could settle the [Affordable Care Act’s] birth control benefit’s fate once and for all.”
- At the Council of State Governments’ Knowledge Center blog, Lisa Sorenen looks at last week’s cert grant in McKinney v. Arizona, in which the court will consider whether current law or the law in effect when a defendant’s conviction originally became final applies to resentencing.
- At Irish Liquor Lawyer, Sean O’Leary ponders how the court will rule and who will write the opinion in Tennessee Wine & Spirits Retailers Association v. Blair, a challenge to Tennessee’s durational residency requirements for liquor licensing.
- At SCOTUS OA, law student Sydney Black maintains that “[a] quantitative analysis of [Justice Brett] Kavanaugh’s voting patterns, cross-referencing behavior, and oral argument questioning suggests that Kavanaugh’s claim to be an originalist is quite dubious.”
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!
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY