Every post published in May 2019, most recent first.
This week we highlight petitions pending before the Supreme Court that address the timeframe for a candidate to challenge a ballot-access rule after the election at issue has passed, and whether the Federal Employers Liability Act permits liability if a plaintiff cannot establish common-law but-for causation.
Last month, the Supreme Court cleared the way for Alabama to execute Christopher Price, who was on death row for the 1991 murder of minister Bill Lynn.
Yesterday challengers to the decision by Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross to include a question about citizenship in the 2020 census alerted the Supreme Court to new evidence indicating that a Republican redistricting strategist played a key role in Ross’ decision and that the question was included to create an advantage for whites and Republicans in future elections.
There is more commentary on Tuesday’s summary reversal in Box v. Planned Parenthood, in which the justices overturned a lower court’s decision striking down an Indiana law with respect to a provision relating to the disposition of fetal remains by abortion providers but left the decision in place with respect to a provision barring abortions based on the disability, sex or race of the fetus.
John Elwood reviews Tuesday’s relists. I’m going to be very summary because of the press of professional obligations this week. As predicted, the Supreme Court agreed with the solicitor general’s recommendation and granted review in Hernandez v. Mesa, 17-1678, involving the liability of American law-enforcement officers who allegedly wrongfully shoot across the U.S.-Mexico border and kill Mexican nationals.
It has been just over a month since the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a challenge to the decision by Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross to include a question about citizenship on the 2020 census.
Section 405(g) of the Social Security Act allows for judicial review of “any final decision … made after a hearing” by the Social Security Administration.
On Tuesday, in Nieves v. Bartlett, a majority finally agreed on a standard for how probable cause affects a civil damages action for First Amendment retaliatory arrest under 42 U.S.C. § 1983: A plaintiff must show the absence of probable cause to arrest as an element of the claim and the presence
Yesterday’s decision in Home Depot USA v. Jackson offers an unusual outcome: a holding by the justices that limits the ability of defendants in large class actions to remove those cases to federal court.
Yesterday the Supreme Court issued three opinions. Mark Walsh has a “view” from the courtroom for yesterday’s session, which included the traditional presentation of Attorney General William Barr to the court.