At the ABA Journal, Mark Walsh covers recent remarks by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in which the justice “poured cold water on the renewed hopes for the 1972 [Equal Rights Amendment’s] becoming part of the U.S. Constitution after Virginia became the 38th state … to ratify the measure.” At The National Law Journal, Tony Mauro reports that “Ginsburg’s long history and preeminence on the issue of women’s rights and the ERA may make her viewpoint difficult to ignore as the revival effort continues,” and that “[h]er comments also quickly drew criticism for setting forth her opinion on the matter as litigation, which could reach the Supreme Court, is pending.” At Vox, Ian Millhiser warns that “Ginsburg’s comments are likely to be the death knell for the ERA.”

At Law360 (subscription required), Natalie Olivo reports that “Intel subsidiary Altera Corp. asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to take up the chipmaker’s challenge to the Treasury Department’s cost-sharing rules, arguing that the Ninth Circuit’s decision to uphold the regulations permitted ‘a startling departure’ from administrative law.” Aysha Bagchi reports for Bloomberg that this “landmark tax case” “concerning assets shifted overseas” is being “watched by Google, Apple, Facebook, and other tech giants.”

Briefly:

  • Kalvis Golde reports for this blog that, in remarks yesterday while dedicating a judicial building in his native state of Georgia, Justice Clarence Thomas focused on “[t]he rule of law, and the judiciary’s role in upholding it.”
  • At The Washington Times (via How Appealing), Christopher Vondracek reports that “[r]eligious school associations and Republican members of Congress are marshaling support for an April showdown in the Supreme Courtover the ‘ministerial exception,’ under which private schools invoke their religious status when faced with wrongful termination lawsuits by staff.”
  • In an op-ed at Brookings, Henry Aaron observes that the Supreme Court’s decision last month not to “grant expedited review of a lower court ruling that would invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act” “spares the Trump administration from being put in an awkward position on health policy in the midst of the 2020 presidential election.”
  • In an op-ed at the Washington Examiner, Hannah Cox speaks for a conservative group opposing the execution of James Dailey, a Florida death-row inmate whose conviction “was based almost entirely on the testimony of prolific jailhouse informants, one of whom was a known crooked cop facing over 20 counts of fraud and larceny”; she argues that “[a]ny judicial system that frequently convicts and executes the innocent will result in a complete erosion of public trust.”

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!

Posted in Round-up

Recommended Citation: Edith Roberts, Wednesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 12, 2020, 7:03 AM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/02/wednesday-round-up-511/