Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our live blog!
We're expecting one or more opinions in argued cases today. As is almost always the case, we don't know how many or which ones.
It's hard even to make many predictions about what we could get. The justices have decided only two cases from their October sitting. But we've already gotten an opinion from the end of January.
If I had to guess, I would guess we'd get either the Puerto Rico case -- whether the members of Puerto Rico's Financial Oversight and Management Board are officers of the United States, who must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate -- or one of the several cases involving Kansas: Kahler v. Kansas (insanity defense), Kansas v. Glover (Fourth Amendment), or Kansas v. Garcia (identity theft and preemption).
There is just one box of opinions today.
For those of you here who are new or new-ish, the number of boxes of opinions waiting to be distributed in the Public Information Office is a rough proxy for the number of opinions that we might get.
It's a fairly busy day at the Court, as we get ready for the oral argument in the challenge to the leadership structure of the CFPB. And people started standing in line yesterday for tomorrow's oral argument in June Medical Services v. Russo, the challenge to a Louisiana law requiring doctors who perform abortions to have the right to admit patients at a nearby hospital.
It was a fairly miserable night to be outside here at the Court last night. It was pretty cold and it rained.
The five-minute buzzer just sounded.
After the last opinion is distributed I will go upstairs quickly for today's oral argument. So please don't be offended if I don't say goodbye.
Okay, going into the PIO to wait for the first (?) opinion. Back soon.
We have just one opinion, from Justice ALito. It is Kansas v. Garcia.
The Supreme Court of Kansas is reversed and remanded. The Court reverses the Kansas Supreme Court's ruling that a provision of the Immigration Reform and Control Act expressly preempts Kansas laws that make it a crime to commit identity theft or engage in fraud to obtain a benefit.
The respondents in this case were convicted under these state laws for fraudulently using another person's Social Security number on state and federal tax-withholding forms that they submitted when they obtained employment.
Amy had to run to catch the argument in the dispute over the future of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Look out for her analysis of that argument soon.
Still a lot of opinions outstanding with big interest. A lot of people have asked about the DACA decision: it's just impossible to say. They may want to get the opinion out early, but it will probably be closely divided and so may not come until late June. Last term, Gundy v. US (5-3) was argued in October and not decided until June 20: an 8 month, 18 day wait.
That's it for today, everyone. We'll keep you posted if further opinion days are announced. Thanks for joining!
Submit Event
