Live blog of orders and opinions | June 10, 2019
We live-blogged as the Supreme Court released orders from the June 6 conference, adding five new cases to its merits docket for next term, and opinions in three argued cases: Quarles v. U.S., Return Mail v. U.S. Postal Service and Parker Drilling v. Newton. SCOTUSblog is sponsored by Casetext: A more intelligent way to search the law.
3rd & 7 37yd
3rd & 7 37yd
B
S
O
close
close

-





-
Here is a link to the opinion in Return Mail. Ronald Mann will have our analysis:
-
The question before the court was whether government is a "person" that can seek review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011, which created the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and creates three new types of administrative proceedings before the board that allow a "person" who is not the patent owner to challenge the validity of a patent after the patent is issued. The answer is that the government is not a person.
-
Here's the opinion in Parker Drilling Management Services v. Newton. Andrew Siegel will have our analysis:
-
This is a case involving the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which applies federal law to the subsoil and seabed of (you guessed it) the outer continental shelf. Under the act, the laws of states adjacent to the shelf are federal law "to the extent that they are applicable and not inconsistent with" other federal law. The question in the case was how to determine which state laws meet this requirement and therefore should be adopted as federal law. The court holds that, when federal law addresses the relevant issue, state law is not adopted as surrogate federal law on the OCS.
-
When the Court finishes up issuing opinions for this term, when is the next time the Court will likely be granting cert for cases for next term (OT 2019)? And, not to involve anything political, but it appears the Court is taking up several cases that address sensitive and controversial issues (issues regarding people who are transgender, a case about guns, and another about a shooting across borders) that are at times in the national spotlight. Just seems interesting to me when the Court this term seemed to shy away from some of the more controversial issues before them (prior to the decision to hear the Census case and their partial upholding/partial denial of cert in the Indiana abortion case) this term.
-
As a reminder, Amy answers a lot of FAQs in this post, which I will link to frequently over the next few weeks: https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/06/faqs-announcements-of-orders-and-opinions-3/