Petitions of the week

This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, whether the due process and equal protection clauses prohibit states from imposing substantial financial burdens on indigent parties seeking judicial review, whether it violates the First Amendment to designate a labor union to represent and speak for public-sector employees who object to its advocacy on their behalf, and whether the Federal Arbitration Act permits a court to refuse to enforce the terms of an arbitration agreement assigning questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator if those terms would be enforceable under ordinary state-law contract principles in a non-arbitration context.

The petitions of the week are below the jump:

Malpasso v. Pallozzi

19-423

Issue: Whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit typical, law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense in any manner.

Facebook Inc. v. Duguid

19-511

Issues: (1) Whether the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991’s prohibition on calls made using an “automatic telephone dialing system” is an unconstitutional restriction of speech, and if so whether the proper remedy is to broaden the prohibition to abridge more speech; and (2) whether the definition of ATDS in the TCPA encompasses any device that can “store” and “automatically dial” telephone numbers, even if the device does not “us[e] a random or sequential number generator.”

Barr v. Marinelarena

19-632

Issue: Whether an alien satisfies her burden of proof to establish that she meets the applicable eligibility requirements for discretionary cancellation of removal when the record establishes that she has been convicted under a statute defining multiple crimes, at least some of which would constitute disqualifying offenses, but it is inconclusive as to which crime formed the basis of the alien’s conviction.

The Rams Football Company, LLC v. St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority

19-672

Issue: Whether the Federal Arbitration Act permits a court to refuse to enforce the terms of an arbitration agreement assigning questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator if those terms would be enforceable under ordinary state-law contract principles in a non-arbitration context.

Reisman v. Associated Faculties of the University of Maine

19-847

Issue: Whether it violates the First Amendment to designate a labor union to represent and speak for public-sector employees who object to its advocacy on their behalf.

Dyroff v. Ultimate Software Group Inc.

19-849

Issues: (1) Whether Section 230(c)(1) of Title 47 of the U.S. Code is a limitation on the definition of a publisher under certain other prohibitions, or a broad grant of immunity to covered publishers; and (2) whether “publisher” in Section 230(c)(1) is limited to the exercise of traditional editorial functions, such as deciding to accept or reject a submission.

GPI Distributors Inc. v. Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District

19-857

Issue: Whether the due process and equal protection clauses prohibit states from imposing substantial financial burdens on indigent parties seeking judicial review (as at least six states have held), or whether states effectively deprive low-income litigants of access to the judicial system (as at least five states have held)—even when the court access in question represents the party’s first opportunity to obtain meaningful judicial review of an involuntary property taking.

Force v. Facebook Inc.

19-859

Issues: (1) Whether Section 230(c)(1) of Title 47 of the U.S. Code is a limitation on the definition of a publisher under certain other prohibitions, or a broad grant of immunity to covered publishers; and (2) whether “publisher” in Section 230(c)(1) is limited to the exercise of traditional editorial functions, such as deciding to accept or reject a submission.

Beers v. Barr

19-864

Issue: Whether the government may permanently deny a mentally healthy, responsible and law-abiding citizen of the United States the opportunity to recover his Second Amendment rights solely because of a long-ago involuntary commitment.

Wexford Health v. Garrett

19-867

Issue: Whether, if a prisoner fails to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit, Section 1997e(a) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act mandates dismissal of the unexhausted claims, or the prisoner may cure his failure to exhaust by filing an amended complaint after his release from prison.