Every post published in November 2018, most recent first.
Oyez has posted the aligned audio and transcripts from this week’s oral arguments at the Supreme Court. The court heard argument this week in: Apple Inc. v. Pepper Nieves v. Bartlett Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert Carpenter v. Murphy Timbs v. Indiana
For The Economist, Steven Mazie reports after Wednesday’s oral argument in Timbs v. Indiana, in which the justices considered whether the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines applies to the states, that “[t]he unusual left-right coalition of organisations urging the Supreme Court to
With its newest member seated on the Supreme Court (and officially included in the latest class picture), the justices continued to project a united front, emphasizing their familial bonds and eschewing the labels of “conservative” and “liberal” altogether. “It was Justice Thomas who tells me that when he first came to the court, another justice approached him and said, ‘I judge you by what you do here.
Next week the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case of an Alabama man who was convicted of both federal and state gun charges arising from the same traffic stop.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address, among other things, the classification of Title VII’s administrative-exhaustion requirement as a jurisdictional prerequisite or a waivable claim-processing rule; the meaning of the statutory term “confidential” in the
For this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court, Amy Howe covers yesterday’s oral argument in Timbs v. Indiana, in which the justices considered whether the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines applies to the states.
In a mixed-bag ruling, a unanimous Supreme Court returned Weyerhaeuser Co. v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to decide several questions not answered on the first go-round.
Anyone who believes civil procedure is not funny should read the transcript of Tuesday’s argument in Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, which showed eight interruptions for laughter in a case considering whether the 14-day period for appealing a class-certification decision is subject to equitable tolling based on concerns for fairness and justice.
Today the justices will hear oral argument in Timbs v. Indiana, in which they will consider whether the Eighth Amendment’s excessive fines clause applies to the states. Amy Howe previewed the case for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court.
The transcript of oral argument in Timbs v. Indiana is available on the Supreme Court’s website.