Virtual five-minute buzzer. Boy do I miss being at the Court. Although I do enjoy doing this in my workout clothes.
The most opinions the justices seem to issue in one swoop these days is five. That would take about 40 minutes if all went well. As we know, that's a big if.
Moving over to hit refresh on my iPad. Let's go!
(The iPad is my high-tech second-screen setup.)
One quick shameless plug: I will have a piece at the ABA Journal's website later today (I think) about the "quiet June," the lack of oral presentations of opinions, whether summaries of the majority or any oral dissents.
We have the first opinion, in DHS v. Thuraissigiam.
The Ninth Circuit ruled in this case that restrictions on the ability of asylum seekers to obtain review under the federal habeas statute are unconstitutional because they suspend the writ of habeas corpus and violate asylum seekers' right to due process. The Supreme Court reverses.
Alito, writing for the court, says that the suspension clause argument fails "because it would extend the writ of habeas corpus far beyond its scope when the Constitution was drafted and ratified."
The due process argument, Alito writes, "fares no better."
This was one of the three remaining decisions from the February session. This leaves Breyer and Roberts as the only two justices without opinions for February. The two remaining decisions for February are Seila Law v. CFPB, the challenge to the constitutionality of the leadership structure of the CFPB, and June Medical v. Russo, the challenge to the Louisiana abortion law requiring doctors who perform abortions to have the right to admit patients at nearby hospitals.
Submit Event
