Every post published in July 2013, most recent first.
By statute, the Chief Justice of the United States has the power to fill positions in the judicial bureaucracy, as well as to appoint judges to specialized courts such as those created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Seeking to speed up Supreme Court action on the legal status of the child known as “Baby Veronica,” lawyers for a South Carolina couple argued on Tuesday that the child’s father — a member of the Cherokee Nation — has put up repeated obstacles to the early resolution of the interstate legal fight over custody of the little girl.
Coverage of the Court yesterday focused on cases that may soon come before the Justices.
The current Court’s constitutional understanding and what it says about the Court’s power and when it should act.
In the wake of last Term’s decision in United States v. Windsor, in which the Court held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional, a federal judge in Pennsylvania has ruled that the widow of a same-sex spouse is entitled to receive the benefits of her spouse’s retirement plan through a private employer.
Geoffrey Stone explains modes of constitutional interpretation.
UPDATED Friday 12:11 p.m. The constitutional issue of police authority to examine the contents of cellphones belonging to people they arrest has now reached the Supreme Court.
At this blog, Lyle Denniston reports on the most recent developments in last Term’s adoption case, Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl: the child’s biological father has asked Chief Justice John Roberts to stay a decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court, which last week ordered a family court in that state to finalize the child’s adoption quickly.
In this six-part series, Geoffrey Stone – the Edward H. Levi Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School – discusses his experience as a Supreme Court clerk for Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., during the October Term 1972 (which included Roe v. Wade and Frontiero v.
The Obama administration, in a sweeping assault on the state of Texas’s history on minorities’ right to vote, asked a federal court in San Antonio on Thursday to impose a ten-year mandate on the state to get official clearance in Washington before it could change any election law or procedure.