Scribble

Live blog of opinions | June 26, 2018 (with SCOTUS Map and First Mondays)

We live-blogged as the Supreme Court released its opinions in Trump v. Hawaii and National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra. Dan Epps and Leah Litman of First Mondays and Victoria Kwan of SCOTUS Map joined us on the live blog.

3rd & 7 37yd

Ok, this is the First Mondays team signing off—that was fun! Remember to listen to the show—we have more great content lined up in the weeks to come!

by Dan Epps 6/26/2018 1:45:43 PM
Do the justices ever read from dissents of denial of cert? Or is that even possible?

by Kal-El 6/26/2018 1:45:45 PM
I see someone is going to KY? Which Justice?

by bwolaver 6/26/2018 1:46:14 PM
There might be video of the boxes from CSPAN's documentary of the court

by Adam B 6/26/2018 1:46:38 PM
I think that the justices should all have their own walk-up songs when they walk out to the bench. Add a little flair to the court

by Jaston 6/26/2018 1:47:40 PM
Thanks everyone, this was fun! Until next time....

by Leah Litman 6/26/2018 1:47:49 PM
As an advocate, doesn’t oral argument questioning allow you to address the questions the justices really want answered, supplemental to briefing, instead of expounding on issues they’ve already made up their minds on? I do also understand the frustration of not being able to get out points you think are important.

by Jim 6/26/2018 1:48:22 PM
@Aladin Huh, Leah, I always heard it was due to him having made up his mind as to the outcome of the cases prior to attending oral argument. All are interesting theories though lol.

by Fan of SCOTUSblgo 6/26/2018 1:48:39 PM
My wife and I saw the movie RBG last weekend. Absolutely fascinating!

by Mark Taylor 6/26/2018 1:49:43 PM
@Jaston Totally would love anything by John Williams.

by Fan of SCOTUSblgo 6/26/2018 1:50:34 PM
Are the justices’ bench memos archived with their papers for academic study?

by No1LyleFan 6/26/2018 1:51:08 PM
@Jaston For RBG: "Staying Alive"

by mts 6/26/2018 1:51:42 PM
One box today, according to Lydia Wheeler of The Hill.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 1:51:57 PM
I cant find the RBG movie anywhere, is it in theaters, IMDB says November.

by Joseph 6/26/2018 1:52:08 PM
Don't Judges Papers become public after 50 years after their departure from the court?

by Joseph 6/26/2018 1:52:38 PM
Does anyone agree with me the travel ban case will be 9-0?

by Lee Goldman 6/26/2018 1:53:12 PM
I think we are looking at two opinions today, and two tomorrow. But as yesterday proves, that's just a guess.

by Eric Citron 6/26/2018 1:53:43 PM
JGR would use a John Sousa march. It’s what he would listen to while practicing attorney before the court.

by Kim 6/26/2018 1:54:33 PM
One box today - My guess is Florida and Janus (or NIFLA)

by AI214 6/26/2018 1:54:51 PM
Justice Black's papers were famously burned at his request after he died IIRC

by Adam B 6/26/2018 1:55:04 PM
I am going to go ahead and apologize in advance for typos that I make going forward. There's a lag of a couple of seconds right now between when I type and when it appears on the screen.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 1:56:16 PM
We heard the five-minute buzzer just now. We'll have something for you soon

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 1:56:34 PM
A reminder that we are expecting the justices to announce opinions in order of reverse seniority. So if we are expecting Alito to write Janus and Breyer to write Fla v. GA, we would get Janus first if those were the opinions for today. Roberts always goes last, and Thomas (who could have NIFLA) would be next to last.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 1:58:00 PM
Okay, headed in now to wait.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 1:58:08 PM
It's another beautiful day at the Court.

by Erica Oleszczuk Evans 6/26/2018 2:00:31 PM
We have the first decision in NIFLA, by Thomas.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:01:39 PM
The vote is 5-4.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:01:51 PM
This case is a First Amendment challenge to a California law that imposes two different sets of requirements on crisis pregnancy centers – non-profits, often affiliated with Christian groups, that oppose abortion. First, it requires centers that are licensed to provide medical services to inform their patients that free or low-cost abortions are available. Second, it requires centers that are not licensed to provide medical services to include in their advertisements disclaimers to make clear that their services do not include medical help.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:02:04 PM
The court reverses on both notice requirements.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:02:24 PM
Here's the opinion in NIFLA v. Becerra. Amy Howe will have our analysis:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1140_5368.pdf

by Andrew Hamm 6/26/2018 2:02:42 PM
Court holds that the challengers are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the FACT Act violates the First Amendment. The Ninth Circuit is reversed, and the case goes back for further proceedings.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:03:22 PM
We are expecting at least one more decision. That could only come from Kennedy or Roberts, and we are only exepcting on from Roberts. Travel ban? We'll know soon enough.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:03:57 PM
There is a concurring opoinon by Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Alito and Gorusch.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:04:13 PM
Isnt 9th circuit the one that get reversed the most?

by PLG 6/26/2018 2:06:11 PM
Breyer is now reading from his dissent, so we will have to wait some more.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:06:32 PM
Do they read the entire dissent or just the roadmap laying out their issues with the opinion?

by Larry 6/26/2018 2:08:51 PM
@AmyHowe Why is the language "likely to succed" - was this actually a case that came up on some sort of injunction type of issue?

by Jonathan K 6/26/2018 2:09:30 PM
In Breyer's view, the notice requirements are likely constitutional. The dissent is longer than the main opinion.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:09:32 PM
Live blog viewer count?

by Charlie 6/26/2018 2:09:57 PM
One interesting dynamic in this case is that many states have laws telling abortion providers what they need to say to women seeking abortions. Those laws have been challenged as undue burdens on the right to obtain an abortion -- and, as Breyer points out, have been upheld since Casey. But they haven't been challenged under the kind of First Amendment theory developed here. In the long run, the ruling here may limit states' ability to force doctors to provide certain kinds of information.

by Eric Citron 6/26/2018 2:10:16 PM
are we looking at this one and florida georgia today you think? and travel ban and janus tomorrow to wrap it up?

by Derek NOLA 6/26/2018 2:10:24 PM
Okay, going back in to wait for the next one.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:11:32 PM
Travel ban, per Roberts. Reversed and remanded.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:15:02 PM
Breyer dissents, joined by Kagan. Sotokmayor dissents, joined by Ginsburgtg.

by Amy Howe 6/26/2018 2:15:24 PM
Here's the opinion in Trump v. Hawaii. Amy Howe will have our analysis:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf

by Andrew Hamm 6/26/2018 2:15:53 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 26, 2018 (with SCOTUS Map and First Mondays)

We live-blogged as the Supreme Court released its opinions in Trump v. Hawaii and National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra. Dan Epps and Leah Litman of First Mondays and Victoria Kwan of SCOTUS Map joined us on the live blog.

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