Petitions of the week
on Jul 8, 2020 at 3:50 pm
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that ask the court to decide, among other things, whether evidence of how other departments of corrections have obtained and successfully administered an alternative execution method is relevant to showing the method is feasible and available under Glossip v. Gross, whether the Sixth and 14th Amendments guarantee a criminal defendant the right to discover potentially exculpatory mental health records held by a private party and whether a state remains immune from suit after voluntarily removing a federal claim to federal court when the state is immune from such claims in its own courts.
The petitions of the week are below the jump:
Malwarebytes Inc. v. Enigma Software Group USA, LLC
19-1284
Issue: Whether federal courts can derive an implied exception to immunity for computer-service providers from most civil liability under Section 230(c)(2)(B) of the Communications Decency Act for blocking or filtering decisions when the decisions are alleged to be “driven by anticompetitive animus.”
Phipps v. Idaho
19-1309
Issue: Whether the “limited authority to detain” during the execution of a judicially approved search warrant for contraband, under Michigan v. Summers, permits probation officers conducting a routine residence check to detain any visitor present, without any suspicion the visitor has done something unlawful or poses a danger.
Nevada v. Walden
19-1315
Issue: Whether a state remains immune from suit after voluntarily removing a federal claim to federal court when the state is immune from such claims in its own courts.
Perez v. Colorado
19-1357
Issue: Whether, and to what extent, the Sixth and 14th Amendments guarantee a criminal defendant the right to discover potentially exculpatory mental health records held by a private party, notwithstanding a state privilege law to the contrary.
Jordan v. Georgia Department of Corrections
19-1361
Issue: Whether evidence of how other departments of corrections have obtained and successfully administered an alternative execution method is relevant to showing the method is feasible and available under Glossip v. Gross.
