Live blog of orders | June 28, 2019
We live-blogged as the Supreme Court releases orders from the June 27 conference. The justices granted 13 cases, for a total of 11 hours of oral argument next term. SCOTUSblog is sponsored by Casetext: A more intelligent way to search the law.
3rd & 7 37yd
3rd & 7 37yd
B
S
O
close
close

-





-
Good morning everyone! Yesterday was frustrating because Carpenter was held over to next term but there was no other information available. Do we expect today’s orders to detail what the Court is doing with Carpenter? Perhaps a new oral argument, or a new set of briefs? And how do we know if Gorsuch is joining in or not next term?
-
I understand the Court’s gerrymandering opinion to rule, very generally, that the Court has no role in drawing election maps; that is it is up to Federal/State legislatures to draft legislation and/or the states to amend their constitutions to remedy this issue, not the Court. And in fact, in an article posted this morning, the New York Times reported that several Democrats, including Pete Buttigieg, Beto O’Rourke and Bernie Sanders, already have plans to introduce legislation that would prohibit partisan gerrymandering. But, should the Democrats take control of the house, senate and presidency and pass election legislation wouldn’t that legislation generally be subject to challenges in Federal Court which might bring gerrymandering back to SCOTUS?
-
Hi all! This morning we are expecting orders from the justices' final conference of the term yesterday. In this post, Amy explains what we mean by "orders." https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/06/faqs-announcements-of-orders-and-opinions-3/
-
In this post, John Elwood looks at the petitions the justices relisted for yesterday's conference. "Relisting" means the justices considered them at one conference and have decided to consider them again, so it's a sign they are giving the petitions some kind of extra look. https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/06/relist-watch-149/
-
Sorry again to go a little off topic, but is there a notion at SCOTUS to file an notice of additional authority? (I've seen this in district/ appellate courts when a relevant decision is rendered in another court). The reason I ask is that the Tennessee wine decision regarding the inability of a state to conduct protective actions on behalf of the businesses within its borders would seem to have a direct impact on next term's NYSRPA v NYC case...
-
Hi all, quick plug before orders come in about 20 minutes. This afternoon at 1:30 Eastern, Tom Goldstein and Sarah Harrington will give a webinar sponsored by Casetext in which they will discuss cases from this term and answer questions. More at this link: https://info.casetext.com/supreme-court-review-registration/
-
This should be a relatively short order list, because it should primarily involve cases that were relisted so that the court can decide whether to grant them or cases that, as one commenter has noted, were being held for a merits case decided recently. (Here I am thinking of a case like Hall v. United States, which looks an awful lot like it was a hold for Gamble v. United States, involving the "separate sovereigns" doctrine.)
-
Some of the petitions that we are watching closely include the trio of DACA cases, the challenge to Alabama's ban on what the state calls "dismemberment" abortions and physicians call "dilation and evacuation" abortions, the "Bridgegate" petition filed by Bridget Kelly, the former deputy chief of staff to Chris Christie, and the case involving the constitutionality of a Montana law that provides tax credits to parents who send their children to private schools. The Montana Supreme Court struck the law down because it allows parents to use the credits for religious schools and therefore, the court said, provides aid to religious institutions.
-
As I look at the entire 2018 Term as a whole, it seems that the Justices were able to work together on a variety of issues which created many crossover votes from one side to the other. Is it fair to say that one of the biggest takeaways from the Term is that the death penalty is the one issue where lines have been drawn?
-
The cases that were being held for merits cases could appear on the order list today as either "GVRs" -- the court grants the petition and vacates the lower court's decision but then immediately sends the case back for the lower court to reconsider the case in light of one of the recent merits rulings -- or straight-up denials, depending on who won or lost in the lower court.
-
There has been some chatter in the press room and elsewhere about the possibility that the DACA cases could be GVR'd -- that is, sent back to the lower courts for reconsideration in light of yesterday's census case. We will know quite soon. I'm going in now to wait for orders. Back soon.
-
-
The justices also grant review in Opati v. Sudan, a case that stems from the 1998 attacks by al Qaeda on the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed over 200 people and injured over 1000 more.In a brief filed late last month, the federal government recommended that the justices grant review to decide whether the current version of the terrorism exception allows punitive damages for pre-enactment conduct.
-
The court grants review in Thole v. US Bank, involving whether a participant in a pension fund can sue the fund managers when he has not actually suffered any financial injury. The justices also asked the parties to brief whether Thole and the other petitioners have shown a legal right to sue.
-
Another grant is in Babb v. Wilkie, in which the justices asked the two sides to brief only whether "the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which provides that personnel actions affecting agency employees aged 40 years or older shall be made free from any 'discrimination based on age," requires a plaintiff to prove that age was a but-for cause of the challenged personnel action."