Scribble

Live blog of opinions | March 20, 2018

This live blog features discussion of the one case decided on this day: Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund.

Dec. 2018

3rd & 7 37yd

Good morning and welcome to the live blog

by Andrew Hamm 3/20/2018 1:47:25 PM
We are waiting for opinions at 10, before the oral argument in NIFLA v. Becerra.

by Edith Roberts 3/20/2018 1:48:19 PM
After opinions at 10am, the court will have oral argument in NIFLA v. Becerra, a First Amendment challenge by crisis-pregnancy centers to a California law requiring certain disclosures.

by Andrew Hamm 3/20/2018 1:48:53 PM
Box count, Edith?

by beggin_4_kagan 3/20/2018 1:49:02 PM
Amy's preview in NIFLA is available at this link:
Argument analysis: Legal questions, practical concerns at play in post-divorce life insurance case - SCOTUSblog
SCOTUSblogWhen Mark Sveen died in 2011, his life insurance policy still named his ex-wife, Kaye Melin, as the beneficiary – even though the couple had divorced four years before. Nothing in the Minnesota couple’s divorce settlement (which divided up, among other things, the all-terrain-vehicle and the snowmob

by Andrew Hamm 3/20/2018 1:49:26 PM
When is the tribal immunity case scheduled to be heard?

by tysonbenson 3/20/2018 1:50:01 PM
Good morning, everyone! Sorry for the delay, but I was having some tech issues.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:50:43 PM
I'm looking at the remaining cases in the October sitting and trying to speculate about who will be writing those. Is it generally the case that the Chief tries to make sure that the Justices write an equal amount of majority opinions per sitting? So if there's three cases left from October, and 3/4 Justices who haven't written an opinion from that sitting, can we infer that those Justices will likely have the remaining opinions?

by Bob Loblaw 3/20/2018 1:50:52 PM
That’s the Sveen life insurance case

by Mark Schmidt 3/20/2018 1:51:07 PM
No boxes yet. For those of you who aren't regulars here, the number of boxes is a rough proxy for the number of decisions we'll get. It's not perfect (for example, if an opinion is very long or very short), but it's what we have.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:52:38 PM
Hoping for the Murphy v. NCAA opinion today. Legalized sports betting would make things.... interesting

by Ramsey 3/20/2018 1:54:15 PM
Masterpiece Cakeshop decided today!*
(*Case will actually not be decided today, in all likelihood.)

by DavidW 3/20/2018 1:54:26 PM
Also, for those of you who aren't regulars here, we don't know what opinions we are going to get or how many.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:54:58 PM
The five-minute buzzer just sounded.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:55:21 PM
It is a cold, rainy day down here at the Court. There are pretty big crowds outside despite the nasty weather, though.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:56:11 PM
One box. I will wait for opinions downstairs this morning and then head up for the argument in the NIFLA case as soon as they are done releasing opinions.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:56:41 PM
Hi All -- looking forward to the opinions. I agree with those that it would be a cute coincidence to get the NJ Sports Betting case in the midst of March Madness, but -- as always -- there's very little chance of predicting what comes out when this time of year.

by Eric Citron 3/20/2018 1:56:49 PM
Right now I am feeling pretty sorry for the folks who were outside all night standing in line waiting to get into the argument (or, in many cases, waiting in line so that someone else could get into the argument).

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:57:25 PM
Hi all! I'm new here. We are waiting until 10am for the opinions to be heard?

by Brooke 3/20/2018 1:57:30 PM
I'm headed into the press office to wait. Back soon . . .

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 1:57:53 PM
Are oral arguments for NIFLA going to be live streamed anywhere?

by TrishKalis 3/20/2018 1:58:27 PM
Only one opinion today?

by Evan 3/20/2018 1:59:31 PM
What time is Becerra being argued?

by Scotus 3/20/2018 1:59:43 PM
One box = 1-2 opinions, usually. I depends on the length of the opinions at issue.

by Eric Citron 3/20/2018 2:00:01 PM
No oral argument streaming in federal courts

by Vseved 3/20/2018 2:00:12 PM
It is Cyan v. Beaver County, per Kagan. Unanimous.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 2:01:13 PM
Decision below is affirmed.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 2:01:35 PM
This is a Goldstein & Russell case, by the way.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 2:01:46 PM
This was a Goldstein & Russell case that Tom Goldstein argued this year, so my opinions cannot be trusted but are definitely correct.

by Eric Citron 3/20/2018 2:01:55 PM
Case, according to Kagan opinion, presents two questions about the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998. First is whether SLUSA strips state courts of jurisdiction over class actions alleging violations of only the Securities Act of 1933. Second is whether, even if not, SLUSA empowered defendants to remove such actions from state to federal court. We answer both questions no, says the Court.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 2:03:06 PM
Here is a link to the opinion in Cyan. Ronald Mann will have our analysis:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/15-1439_8njq.pdf

by Andrew Hamm 3/20/2018 2:03:21 PM
And that is all for this morning. I am headed upstairs.

by Amy Howe 3/20/2018 2:03:27 PM
Exciting!

by Eric Citron 3/20/2018 2:04:13 PM
Opinions tomorrow too?

by Vseved 3/20/2018 2:07:18 PM
Any more opinions for today or is it ok to log off?

by Brooke 3/20/2018 2:10:45 PM
Thank you, everyone -- hope to see you again tomorrow!

by Andrew Hamm 3/20/2018 2:11:36 PM

Featured Posts

Government returns to Supreme Court on military transgender ban – Amy Howe

Symposium: Crosses and constitutional clarity – Lindsay See

Symposium: Cross purposes -- Why a Christian symbol can’t memorialize all war dead – Richard B. Katskee
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 released orders from the December 7 conference on Monday; the justices added Kisor v. Wilkie to their merits docket for this term. The justices also released their decision in United States v. Stitt on Monday.
The justices will meet next for their January 4 conference. The calendar for the January sitting, which will begin on January 7, is available on the Supreme Court's website.
Recent Decisions
- United States v. Stitt The term "burglary" in the Armed Career Criminal Act includes burglary of a structure or vehicle that has been adapted or is customarily used for overnight accommodation.
- Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service An area is eligible for designation as “critical habitat” under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 only if it is habitat for the listed species; and the decision by the secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior not to exclude an area from critical habitat under 16 U. S. C. §1533(b)(2) is subject to judicial review.
- Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido State and local governments are covered employers under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 regardless of the number of employees they have.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- City of Escondido, California v. Emmons (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit erred in denying the officers qualified immunity by considering clearly established law at too high a level of generality rather than giving particularized consideration to the facts and circumstances of this case; (2) whether the lower court erred in denying the officers qualified immunity by relying on a single decision, published after the event in question, to support its conclusion that qualified immunity is not available; and (3) whether the lower court erred in failing or refusing to decide whether the subject arrest was without probable cause or subject to qualified immunity.
- Hester v. United States Whether the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey–which held that any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt–should apply to the imposition of criminal restitution.
- Kennedy v. Bremerton School District Whether public school teachers and coaches retain any First Amendment rights when at work and “in the general presence of” students.
More Petitions »
Major Cases
- 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.
- In re Department of Commerce
  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.
- 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.
- Timbs v. Indiana
  Whether the Eighth Amendment’s excessive fines clause is incorporated against the states under the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Apple Inc. v. Pepper
  Whether consumers may sue anyone who delivers goods to them for antitrust damages, even when they seek damages based on prices set by third parties who would be the immediate victims of the alleged offense.
see all this term’s cases »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 32

Cases decided 3

Summary reversals 0

Merits cases granted to date 57

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Full Calendar Submit Event

3
Orders
DAWSON V. STEAGER (17-419)
LORENZO V. SEC (17-1077)

4
BIESTEK V. BERRYHILL (17-1184)
HELSINN HEALTHCARE V. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS (17-1229)

5
Supreme Court building closed for National Day of Mourning for George H.W. Bush

6
GAMBLE V. UNITED STATES (17-646)

7
Conference

10
Orders
Opinions

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.