The cases from the October and November sittings have now all been decided.
In December, there are only two cases left: Dollar General (a Goldstein & Russell case) and Fisher v. UT Austin. Roberts is the only one who has not yet authored an opinion from December. So he almost certainly has one of those. Justice Antonin Scalia had also not yet issued an opinion from December before he passed away in February, and it seems unlikely that he was writing Fisher. That would seem to suggest that Roberts is writing Fisher and that either he or someone else (but not Breyer, who has already written twice for December) is writing Dollar General.
All of the January cases have been decided except Sanchez Valle, the Puerto Rico double jeopardy cases. Neither Kagan nor Alito has written yet for this sitting, so it is almost certainly one of them.
There are seven cases left from the February sitting: Kingdomware Technologies v. United States, Utah v. Strieff, Taylor v. United States, Halo/Stryker, Voisine, Williams v. Pennsylvania, and Whole Woman’s Health. Too many cases left to try to predict which Justices might be writing.
To make clear in response to a variety of questions/comments, we don't know what opinions we will get today or how many.
Two boxes, according to Lyle.
Good morning from press room.
To continue my tea-leaf reading, b/c I got sidetracked, March is easier to game. RJR Nabisco and Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust are the only two cases left. Alito and Thomas have not yet written for March, and Alito is recused from these Puerto Rico cases. This is a logic problem even I can solve . . . Thomas is likely writing in these Puerto Rico cases.
All of the April cases are still outstanding, so all bets are off for them.
Here's Lyle with the first opinion.
Puerto Rico Double Jeopardy.
The decision of the Puerto Rico Supreme Court is affirmed, per Kagan.
Decision is six to two; Breyer dissents, joined by Sotomayor.
Ginsburg concurs, joined by Thomas. Thomas concurs in part and in the judgment.
The holding: The Double Jeopardy Clause bars Puerto Rico and the United States from successively prosecuting a single person for the same conduct under equivalent criminal laws.
This is a blow to the sovereignty interests of Puerto Rico, which wanted to prosecute for the same conduct as had already been prosecuted under the United States.
We do expect more. The Justices announce opinions in order of reverse seniority, so we could hear from Kagan or anyone else today.
Second opinion is Dietz v. Bouldin.
Justice Sotomayor writes for the Court.
The decision of the Ninth Circuit is affirmed.
Vote is six to two. Thomas dissents, joined by Kennedy.
The holding: A federal district court has a limited inherent power to rescind a jury discharge order and recall a jury in a civil case for further deliberations after identifying an error in the jury verdict.
The district court did not abuse that power here.
So nothing more from Kagan today; we could hear from Sotomayor or anyone else, though.
Dietz appears to be the first of the April cases decided.
Notably, both Justice Kagan's majority and the dissent in the Puerto Rico case are very careful to flag that the holding relates only to a "narrow" or "special" question about PR's sovereignty, and that the decision does not affect anything beyond the double jeopardy question. That's an example of the Court asking folks not to read anything into today's opinion regarding PR's debt crisis or any other questions about its future.