Every post published in February 2015, most recent first.
At 11 a.m. Monday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument to continue to explore the constitutional right of an accused person to confront at trial the witnesses for the prosecution.
Oyez has posted audio recordings and transcripts of this week’s arguments. The Court heard arguments this week in: Coleman v. Tollefson Kerry v. Din Tibble v. Edison International Henderson v. United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Baker Botts, LLP v. ASARCO, LLC
Scholars are now analyzing Supreme Court opinions for their style as well as their substance. Keith Carlson (a computer scientist), Michael A. Livermore (a law professor), and Daniel Rockmore (a mathematician) have just posted on SSRN a quantitative analysis of the writing style of all Supreme Court opinions between 1791 and 2008.
All eyes are on next week’s oral arguments in King v. Burwell, the challenge to the availability of tax subsidies for individuals who purchase their health insurance on a marketplace created by the federal government.
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. It has been a rough month since our last installment. Much of the country, from the Dakotas to Dallas, has seen record low temperatures, causing pipes to burst, and creating icy roads and massive pile-ups.
At 10 a.m. Monday, the Supreme Court will hear one hour of oral argument on the power of voters to take away from state legislatures the task of drawing new election district maps.
Whether deservedly or not, an opinion by Ninth Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt granting habeas relief to a state prisoner notwithstanding the deferential approach mandated by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) is often fodder for terse – if not summary – reversals by the Supreme Court.
The Court has announced that it will be posting the merits briefs in the same-sex marriage cases: Obergfell v. Hodges, Tanco v. Haslam, DeBoer v. Snyder, and Bourke v. Beshear.
It looks like the Justices are firmly committed to deciding Tibble v. Edison International, even though the parties now agree on the big issue on which the Justices granted review: whether the fiduciaries of an ERISA plan have a continuing duty of prudence that requires periodic monitoring of investments, or is the duty instead measured at the single point in time when the investment is made.
At its Conference on February 27, 2015, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as Article III standing in class actions, exemption from California’s campaign finance disclosure requirements, and the retroactive application of Miller v. Alabama.