The Week Ahead
The Justices are scheduled to hold their first private conference of 2008 on Friday, orders from which could be released as soon as the following Monday, Jan. 7. Click here to view our list of petitions to watch at the conference.
Every post published in 2007, most recent first.
The Justices are scheduled to hold their first private conference of 2008 on Friday, orders from which could be released as soon as the following Monday, Jan. 7. Click here to view our list of petitions to watch at the conference.
The latest edition of “Petitions to Watch” features cases up for consideration at the Justices’ private conference of January 11, 2008. As always, the list reflects the petitions on the Court’s ‘paid’ docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted.
I would like to wish all of our readers a happy new year, and specially thank those of you who have contributed with questions or comments on our “ask the author” and academic roundup series.
Jody Freeman (Harvard Law School) and Adrian Vermeule (Harvard Law School) have posted “Massachusetts v. EPA: From Politics to Expertise” on SSRN, see here.
Exxon Mobil Corp. and three affiliated companies, including a natural gas subsidiary in Indonesia, on Thursday asked Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., to order a delay in current District Court proceedings in a case that is also pending on the Supreme Court’s docket.
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the case Klein & Co. Futures v. New York City Board of Trade (06-1265), which was being deliberated after an argument on Oct. 29.
By agreement of the parties, the case of Ali v. Achim, et al. (06-1346) has been dismissed by the Supreme Court. Granted review on Sept. 25, the case involved the question whether a criminal conviction must be an “aggravated felony” to qualify as the kind of crime that bars a convicted alien from remaining in the U.S.
With so many people picking up iPhones over the holidays, we wanted to interrupt our regular posts to show you what Tom keeps on his iPhone… Happy Holidays! [youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW8XaGg_05w]
The federal government has recommended the Court grant certiorari (see here) in No. 06-1505, Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Lab, et al., limited to the question asking whether, under the Court’s 2005 decision in Smith v. City of Jackson, an employee alleging disparate impact under the ADEA has the burden of persuasion in establishing “reasonable factors other than age.”
As many of my prior academic round-ups have intimated, some of the most interesting work on the Supreme Court is being done by political scientists.