Scribble

Live blog of opinions | June 21, 2018 (with First Mondays)

We live-blogged as the Supreme Court released opinions in argued cases. The justices decided Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc., Pereira v. Sessions and Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. United States. Guest bloggers Dan Epps, Ian Samuel and Leah Litman of First Mondays live-blogged from 9 to 9:45 a.m.

3rd & 7 37yd

It's after 930. Why aren't the order being live blogged here?

by Andrew 6/21/2018 1:43:09 PM
Now that Scalia is gone, which pair of Justices appear to be the closest friends? When Scalia was on the bench, it seemed like he was in the middle of the two most celebrated pairings - Scalia/Thomas and Scalia/Ginsburg.

by SMC 6/21/2018 1:43:52 PM
How quickly might a case involving child separation at the border make it to the Court?

by David 6/21/2018 1:44:03 PM
Can you post a picture of a box?

by APD 6/21/2018 1:44:08 PM
Which justices hire counter-clerks?

by Bricked It 6/21/2018 1:44:36 PM
Dumb question: What is a counter-clerk?

by AP 6/21/2018 1:45:05 PM
What do you think of term limits on a Chief Justice's tenure? (You know, so we'd have a shot at getting a Kagan Court someday.)

by JS 6/21/2018 1:45:17 PM
Do only site admins have gif posting privileges? I feel like I can't properly express myself without them.

by TrutherVandross 6/21/2018 1:46:52 PM
Where does the principle of one opinion per Justice per sitting come from? Why does the Court adhere to it?

by Kommodore M—. 6/21/2018 1:47:03 PM
Ok, it's time let the grownups take control again. This has been fun!

by Dan Epps 6/21/2018 1:47:38 PM
Okay, I think we're supposed to wrap this up now so that the actual reporters can take over and tell you guys about opinions. Great to be with you, and see you next time!

by Ian Samuel 6/21/2018 1:48:14 PM
This was a lot of fun--thanks everyone, and thanks SCOTUSBlog for having us!

by Leah Litman 6/21/2018 1:48:39 PM
Good morning, everyone! Thanks for joining us, and thanks SO much to the First Mondays crew for joining us again today.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:49:13 PM
We wait for the Supremes to give meaning to our day. And that's the way it is.

by Walter ConLawKite 6/21/2018 1:49:33 PM
Any guesses on how many decision days they have left? Today then next Monday and Thursday? (Apologies if this has already been asked - just logging in)

by Mason Seitz 6/21/2018 1:49:36 PM
And, as in the past few days, I will say this lovingly: We don't know how many opinions we are going to get, nor do we know which ones.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:50:42 PM
There are times when journalists indicate that they have a heads up as which decisions will be issued. They're mostly wrong. Which raises a question. Is the Supreme Court the last part of the government that is apparently leak-free?

by Internet Freud 6/21/2018 1:51:38 PM
+1 on a picture of a box

by Adam B 6/21/2018 1:51:42 PM
No boxes yet, for those who are interested. To answer a couple of questions from past live blogs, I would say that three of the boxes used to hold opinions at the PIO are roughly the size, collectively, of one banker's box.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:51:51 PM
It's great to see First Mondays participating! Love that podcast!

by The Chief 6/21/2018 1:52:40 PM
To answer another question, I am sitting in the press room, which is adjacent to the Public Information Office, where we get the opinions as they are released. It's about a 10-yard trip (if that) from the desk in the PIO where we get the opinions to my desk in the press room. So it doesn't take me very long, although when there are a lot of reporters here it can get a little congested going in and out of the PIO.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:53:25 PM
Let's pretend I'm a huge SCOTUS nerd and want to come on an opinion day solely to get a printed opinion from the PIO, which I believe any person can do. Do I need to wait in the same lines as other members of the public, or how can I get there?

by oxwof 6/21/2018 1:53:43 PM
Amy answers frequently asked questions in this post:

FAQs: Announcements of orders and opinions - SCOTUSblog
SCOTUSblogThis post — which is an updated version of posts that we have published in earlier terms — addresses some of the questions about orders and opinion announcements that we have commonly received during our live blogs. If you have a question that you don’t see answered here, please feel free to ask it

by Andrew Hamm 6/21/2018 1:54:36 PM
Can you please create a way for us to love or like responses to questions/comments? Because some of your responses are THE BEST and I'd really like to show it!

by Midwest is best 6/21/2018 1:54:37 PM
How many opportunities are left for opinions to be issued? I heard this is the next to last.

by bruceritchie 6/21/2018 1:54:45 PM
Two boxes today. And the five-minute buzzer just sounded. Mark Walsh has already gone up to the courtroom to give us a "view" on the goings-on there today.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:55:33 PM
Can you tell I'm really excited?

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:55:40 PM
And have also had too much caffeine?

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:55:58 PM
does the chronological order of when the case was heard matter?

by Pennoyer 6/21/2018 1:56:23 PM
Two boxes -- half way to two days of infinite glory.

by Eric Citron 6/21/2018 1:56:38 PM
@AmyHowe Is there ever too much caffeine . . .

by Loretta Kane 6/21/2018 1:57:02 PM
Thanks to Erica Evans for this picture of the court.

by Andrew Hamm 6/21/2018 1:58:10 PM
Okay, going in to wait for opinions now. Back soon!

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 1:58:13 PM
@bruceritchie So next week is the last week for opinions to be issued? So if a case was argued this year, it will HAVE to come out next week -- right? Thanks.

by bruceritchie 6/21/2018 1:59:43 PM
Gorsuch has the first opinion, in Wisconsin Central v. US. The Seventh Circuit is reversed and remanded.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:01:42 PM
This case centers on a provision of the Railroad Retirement Act which defines “compensation” (for tax purposes) as “any form of money remuneration paid to an individual for services rendered as an employee.” The question is whether the exercise of stock options falls within the statute’s definition of “compensation.”

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:01:58 PM
Here's the opinion in Wisconsin Central v. US. Daniel Hemel from UChicago Law will have our analysis:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-530_6537.pdf

by Andrew Hamm 6/21/2018 2:02:37 PM
Court says that employee stock options are NOT taxable compensation for purposes of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act because they are not "money remuneration."

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:02:39 PM
I think this means big tax refunds for the railroads; not sure that there's a lot of broader significance.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:02:58 PM
It is 5-4; Breyer dissents, joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:03:22 PM
Gorsuch is still reading from his summary of the opinion; I am not sure that there's a whole lot else that I'm going to say about the ruling right now unless Breyer dissents from the bench, which seems unlikely.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:04:27 PM
I will point out that, under the Court's normal opinion announcement rules, we could get opinions again from Gorsuch or anyone else today. The possibilities are endless!

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:05:03 PM
Interesting to see the RR employer and employee join forces on this issue.

by Sarah Harrington 6/21/2018 2:05:17 PM
We have the next opinion, Lucia v. SEC, from Justice Kagan.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:06:26 PM
The DC Circuit's decision is reversed and remanded. This is a big deal.

by Amy Howe 6/21/2018 2:06:44 PM

Featured Posts

Challengers urge justices to dismiss census case after district court ruling (Updated) – Amy Howe

Reargument analysis: Justices seek a “middle position” in takings litigation case – Miriam Seifter

Argument analysis: Justices have strong views about removal of class actions – Ronald Mann
Email Digest Sign-Up
Receive a daily email digest from Feedburner by entering your email.
Merits Case Pages and Archives

Archives

or

This Week at the Court
The Supreme Court will release orders from the January 18 conference on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m. There is a possibility of opinions on Tuesday at 10 a.m.
The justices will meet next for their February 15 conference.
The calendar for the February sitting, which will begin on Tuesday, February 19, is available on the Supreme Court's website.
Recent Decisions
- New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira A court should determine whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s Section 1 exclusion for disputes involving the “contracts of employment” of certain transportation workers applies before ordering arbitration; here, truck driver Dominic Oliveira’s independent contractor operating agreement with New Prime Inc. falls within that exception.
- Stokeling v. United States The Armed Career Criminal Act’s elements clause encompasses a robbery offense that, like Florida’s law, requires the criminal to overcome the victim’s resistance.
- Culbertson v. Berryhill The Social Security Act’s fee cap of 25 percent of past-due benefits imposed on attorneys who successfully represent Title II benefit claimants in court proceedings applies only to fees for court representation and not to aggregate fees for both court and agency representation.
- Henry Schein Inc. v. Archer and White Sales Inc. The “wholly groundless” exception to the general rule that courts must enforce contracts that delegate threshold arbitrability questions to an arbitrator, not a court, is inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and Supreme Court precedent.
- City of Escondido, California v. Emmons The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit failed to conduct the analysis required by Supreme Court precedents in determining whether two Escondido police officers were entitled to qualified immunity.
- Shoop v. Hill Because Danny Hill’s intellectual disability claim must be evaluated based solely on holdings of the Supreme Court that were clearly established at the time the state-court decisions were rendered, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit’s reliance on Moore v. Texas -- which was handed down much later -- was plainly improper.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda Whether the prohibition in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), against employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” encompasses discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation.
- Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2.
- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. (1) Whether a state may require health-care facilities to dispose of fetal remains in the same manner as other human remains, i.e., by burial or cremation; and (2) whether a state may prohibit abortions motivated solely by the race, sex or disability of the fetus and require abortion doctors to inform patients of the prohibition.
More Petitions »
Major Cases
- Lamone v. Benisek
  In case in which the plaintiffs allege that a Maryland congressional district was gerrymandered to retaliate against them for their political views: (1) whether the various legal claims articulated by the three-judge district court are unmanageable; (2) whether the three-judge district court erred when, in granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, it resolved disputes of material fact as to multiple elements of plaintiffs’ claims, failed to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and treated as “undisputed” evidence that is the subject of still-unresolved hearsay and other evidentiary objections; and (3) whether the three-judge district court abused its discretion in entering an injunction despite the plaintiffs’ years-long delay in seeking injunctive relief, rendering the remedy applicable to at most one election before the next decennial census necessitates another redistricting.
- Kisor v. Wilkie
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Auer v. Robbins and Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., which direct courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation.
- Department of Commerce v. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
  Whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker—including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking Executive Branch officials—when there is no evidence that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis.
- Rucho v. Common Cause
  (1) Whether plaintiffs have standing to press their partisan gerrymandering claims; (2) whether plaintiffs’ partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable; and (3) whether North Carolina’s 2016 congressional map is, in fact, an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.
- The American Legion v. American Humanist Association
  (1) Whether a 93-year-old memorial to the fallen of World War I is unconstitutional merely because it is shaped like a cross; (2) whether the constitutionality of a passive display incorporating religious symbolism should be assessed under the tests articulated in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Van Orden v. Perry, Town of Greece v. Galloway or some other test; and (3) whether, if the test from Lemon v. Kurtzman applies, the expenditure of funds for the routine upkeep and maintenance of a cross-shaped war memorial, without more, amounts to an excessive entanglement with religion in violation of the First Amendment.
- Gamble v. United States
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule the “separate sovereigns” exception to the double jeopardy clause.
see all this term’s cases »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 43

Cases decided 9

Summary reversals 2

Merits cases granted to date 73

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Full Calendar Submit Event

Jan. 2019

Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
		1 Holiday	2	3	4 Conference	5
6	7 Orders MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP. V. ALBRECHT (17-290) OBDUSKEY V. MCCARTHY & HOLTHUS LLP (17-1307)	8 HERRERA V. WYOMING (17-532) FOURTH ESTATE PUBLIC BENEFIT CORP. V. WALL-STREET.COM, LLC (17-571) Opinions	9 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD OF CALIFORNIA V. HYATT (17-1299)	10	11 Conference	12
13	14 Orders THACKER V. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (17-1201) RIMINI STREET INC. V. ORACLE USA INC. (17-1625)	15 HOME DEPOT U.S.A. INC. V. JACKSON (17-1471) AZAR V. ALLINA HEALTH SERVICES (17-1484) Opinions	16 KNICK V. TOWNSHIP OF SCOTT, PENNSYLVANIA (17-647) TENNESSEE WINE AND SPIRITS RETAILERS ASSOCIATION V. BLAIR (18-96)	17	18 Conference	19
20	21 Holiday	22 Orders Opinions	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Orders/Opinions
Arguments
Conferences

Events
Holidays
Multiple

Download our App in the Apple Store
First Mondays see all
Videos see all

Justice Sotomayor at Harvard

On November 13, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and Judge Susan Carney of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit presided over the final round of the 2018 Ames Moot Court Competition at Harvard Law School.

Peabody Award
Awarded the Peabody Award for excellence in electronic media.
Sigma Delta Chi
Awarded the Sigma Delta Chi deadline reporting award for online coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
National Press Club Award
Awarded the National Press Club's Breaking News Award for coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
Silver Gavel Award
Awarded the Silver Gavel Award by the American Bar Association for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system.
American Gavel Award
Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Webby Award
Awarded the Webby Award for excellence on the internet.

Cases argued	43
Cases decided	9
Summary reversals	2
Merits cases granted to date	73

Editor's Note :

Scribble

Live blog of opinions | June 21, 2018 (with First Mondays)

Featured Posts

Challengers urge justices to dismiss census case after district court ruling (Updated) – Amy Howe

Reargument analysis: Justices seek a “middle position” in takings litigation case – Miriam Seifter

Argument analysis: Justices have strong views about removal of class actions – Ronald Mann

Email Digest Sign-Up

Merits Case Pages and Archives

Recent Decisions

Current Relists

Conference of January 18, 2019

Major Cases

Recent Special Features

Live Blog Archives

Jan. 2019

Download our App in the Apple Store

First Mondays see all

Videos see all

Peabody Award

Sigma Delta Chi

National Press Club Award

Silver Gavel Award

American Gavel Award

Webby Award