Scribble

Scribble

Opinion analysis: Justices narrow bankrupts’ power to rescind contracts in bankruptcy – Ronald Mann

Opinion analysis: Clarity on “clear evidence” of drug pre-emption? – Elizabeth McCuskey

Opinion analysis: Court rejects issue preclusion in affirming Crow Tribe’s treaty hunting right – Gregory Ablavsky

Live blog of orders and opinions | June 15, 2015

Live blog of orders and opinions | June 15, 2015

Featured Posts

Sponsored by Casetext

SCOTUStalk see all

Email Digest Sign-Up

Merits Case Pages and Archives

Major Cases

Recent Decisions

Current Relists

Recent Special Features

Live Blog Archives

Merits Docket OT18 (May 20, 2019)

Merits Cases by Sitting

Majority Opinions by Author

Voting Breakdown Argued Cases

Majority Lineup 5-4 Decisions

May 2019

Download our App in the Apple Store

Videos see all

Peabody Award

Sigma Delta Chi

National Press Club Award

Silver Gavel Award

American Gavel Award

Webby Award

Conference of May 23, 2019

3rd & 7 37yd

Good morning and welcome to our live blog of orders and opinions. Thanks for joining us! We will be getting started in a few moments.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:18:43 PM

Comment ()
Meanwhile, Kevin Russell tells us that Jim Obergefell is at the front of the public line to get into the Court for opinions this morning.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:20:59 PM

Comment ()
Good morning from the Court's press room.

by lylden 6/15/2015 1:22:25 PM

Comment ()
Good morning, everyone! Sorry for the late start.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:25:56 PM

Comment ()
Do parties to cases pending opinion have an easier time getting into the courtroom for opinion days, or did Mr. Obergefell have to (pay someone to?) wait in line like everyone else?

by oxwof 6/15/2015 1:26:00 PM

Comment ()
Would they tell him in advance that his case is coming up?

by Supreme Lurker 6/15/2015 1:26:31 PM

Comment ()
We are expecting orders from last week's conference at 9:30. Lyle will relay them to us as they are released.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:26:53 PM

Comment ()
Among others, we are waiting on Fisher v. UT Austin, the affirmative action case (round 2), and the Mississippi abortion case, which became even more interesting in light of last week's decision by the Fifth Circuit on Texas abortion restrictions.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:27:29 PM

Comment ()
After orders at 9:30, we will switch over to talking about opinions, which we expect at 10 am.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:28:35 PM

Comment ()
Is the Monday order list typically posted on the Court's website at the same time it is released at the press room, or does that typically happen later in the day?

by bhanley 6/15/2015 1:29:15 PM

Comment ()
Here's Lyle.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:30:33 PM

Comment ()
We have two grants. Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw and Bruce v. Samuels.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:30:55 PM

Comment ()
The first is a Native American jurisdiction case.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:31:02 PM

Comment ()
Goldstein & Russell represents Dollar General, BTW.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:31:17 PM

Comment ()
Here is our page for Bruce.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:31:38 PM

Comment ()
They did not act on either Fisher v. UT Austin or Currier v. Jackson Health, the Mississippi abortion case.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:31:50 PM

Comment ()
The QP is: Whether, when a prisoner files more than one case or appeal in the federal courts in forma pauperis, the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), caps the monthly exaction of filing fees at 20% of the prisoner's monthly income regardless of the number of cases or appeals for which he owes filing fees.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:31:51 PM

Comment ()
There are no CVSGs.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:31:53 PM

Comment ()
There is a denial in Hittson v. Chatman; RBG joined by Kagan concurs in the denial with a separate opinion. Interesting.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:32:30 PM

Comment ()
The question in Dollar General is: Whether Indian tribal courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate civil tort claims against nonmembers, including as a means of regulating the conduct of nonmembers who enter into consensual relationships with a tribe or its members. Our page is here.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:32:38 PM

Comment ()
There is a denial in the NC abortion ultrasound case.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:33:01 PM

Comment ()
I don't remember a separate written concurrence on a denial of cert before. Just separate dissents.

by David Souter's Comet Lander 6/15/2015 1:34:44 PM

Comment ()
Again no action on Fisher or abortion case. It seems either wing could get four votes to grant review...you think opinions being drafter regarding denial?

by Silent Justice Thomas 6/15/2015 1:35:20 PM

Comment ()
The full order list is here.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:36:12 PM

Comment ()
The SG had recommended that cert. be denied in Dollar General, but the Court granted anyway.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:36:35 PM

Comment ()
The order list also contains a whole slew of GVRs of petitions filed by Bank of America in the wake of Bank of America v. Caulkett, the bankruptcy/underwater mortgages case decided earlier this spring.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:37:38 PM

Comment ()
The North Carolina ultrasound case to which I referred earlier was 14-1172, Walker-McGill v. Stuart. Justice Scalia dissented from the denial, although apparently without an opinion.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:40:46 PM

Comment ()
North Carolina was asking the Supreme Court to review a ruling by the Fourth Circuit that blocked a state law requiring a woman to have a narrated ultrasound before she could have an abortion from going into effect.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:41:51 PM

Comment ()
I know the Court takes the bench to issue opinions. Does the Court also take the bench for orders or is that handled by the Clerk's office?

by Brad 6/15/2015 1:41:53 PM

Comment ()
When the Court grants a motion for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae, yet denies the petition for certiorari, do amici curiae typically file those briefs, or do they desist?

by Ian 6/15/2015 1:42:23 PM

Comment ()
Okay, let's start talking about opinions now. We have sixteen minutes until 10 am, when the Court will start to release opinions.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:44:07 PM

Comment ()
As is virtually always the case (unless it is the last day of the Term), we don't know what we are getting today. It could, at least in theory, be any of the cases that are outstanding.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:44:38 PM

Comment ()
For quick reference, all the undecided cases are listed here.

by Kali Borkoski 6/15/2015 1:44:57 PM

Comment ()
Having said that, the conventional wisdom is that the super big cases are not likely to come out until the end of the Term. And by super big (a highly technical term), I mean Obergefell (same-sex marriage) and King (ACA subsidies).

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:45:37 PM

Comment ()
I would also put Glossip v. Gross, the OK lethal injection challenge, in the category of not-likely-to-happen-today.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:46:11 PM

Comment ()
Has Jim Obergefell previously attended any O&O days this term? I'm unsuccessfully trying to not read too much into his presence at the front of the line.

by Midwest Researcher 6/15/2015 1:46:19 PM

Comment ()
J. Ginsburg' concurrence in cert denial in AEDPA case invites 11th cir. to grant en banc review to correct its error. Justice Ginsburg likes invitations. Invited Congress to overturn Ledbetter, Shelby County papers.ssrn.com …

by Rick Hasen 6/15/2015 1:47:05 PM

Comment ()
If I had to bet on a "big" case for today, it would be the Texas Fair Housing Act case, which was argued in January.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:47:26 PM

Comment ()
Also the Arizona redistricting commission case, which was argued in early March. But this is all just speculation.

by Amy Howe 6/15/2015 1:47:49 PM

Comment ()
Is there any particular reason to wait? I can understand large cases taking longer to write opinions on but is it just tradition or is there another reason to wait until the end of the term?

by jmckee 6/15/2015 1:47:53 PM

Comment ()
Any idea how to pronounce "Obergefell?" USA Today had an extremely cryptic pronunciation parenthetical a couple months ago that seemed to indicate stress was on the "O" which couldn't possibly be right...

by Jared 6/15/2015 1:49:04 PM

Comment ()
While I understand that practitioners before the court may be reluctant on this question, I do wonder whether the retention of the "big" cases for the last day of the term is a build up of drama, much in keeping with theme of court drama as seen in film / TV?

by MattInBham1979 6/15/2015 1:49:46 PM

Comment ()
Reed and Texas DHCA are the two January cases still to report an opinion. I note that neither Thomas nor Kennedy has written from the January cases. Most likely that one is writing Reed and the other fair housing?

by dmcesq 6/15/2015 1:50:44 PM

Comment ()
Obergefell has said that he plans on attending every decision day until the court case comes down. Chris Geidner mentioned it on his twitter.

by sociologywriter2012 6/15/2015 1:51:01 PM

Comment ()
Amy, I think "super big" is the perfect phrase for both of those cases.

by Jim Hutchins 6/15/2015 1:51:09 PM

Comment ()

Featured Posts

Opinion analysis: Justices narrow bankrupts’ power to rescind contracts in bankruptcy – Ronald Mann

Opinion analysis: Clarity on “clear evidence” of drug pre-emption? – Elizabeth McCuskey

Opinion analysis: Court rejects issue preclusion in affirming Crow Tribe’s treaty hunting right – Gregory Ablavsky
Sponsored by Casetext
SCOTUStalk see all
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 May 16 conference on Monday; the justices granted Ritzen Group Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC.
On Monday, the justices released their opinions in Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, Herrera v. Wyoming and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht.
On Thursday, the justices meet for their May 23 conference.
Major Cases
- Department of Commerce v. New York
  (1) Whether the district court erred in enjoining the secretary of the Department of Commerce from reinstating a question about citizenship to the 2020 decennial census on the ground that the secretary’s decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq; (2) whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the APA, 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 -- without a strong showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis; and (3) whether the secretary’s decision to add a citizenship question to the decennial census violated the enumeration clause of the U.S. Constitution.
- 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.
- 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 Decisions
- Herrera v. Wyoming Wyoming’s statehood did not abrogate the Crow Tribe’s 1868 federal treaty right to hunt on the “unoccupied lands of the United States”; the lands of the Bighorn National Forest did not become categorically “occupied” when the forest was created.
- Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht “Clear evidence” that the Food and Drug Administration would not have approved a change to a drug’s label – thus pre-empting a state-law failure-to-warn claim – is evidence showing that the drug manufacturer fully informed the FDA of the justifications for the warning required by state law and that the FDA, in turn, informed the drug manufacturer that the FDA would not approve a change to the drug’s label to include that warning; the question of agency disapproval is primarily one of law for a judge to decide.
- Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC A bankruptcy debtor’s rejection of an executory contract under 11 U.S.C. §365 has the same effect as a breach of that contract outside bankruptcy; such an act thus cannot rescind rights that the contract previously granted.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- al-Alwi v. Trump (1) Whether the government’s statutory authority to detain Moath Hamza Ahmed al-Alwi has unraveled; (2) whether, alternatively, the government’s statutory authority to detain al-Alwi has expired because the conflict in which he was captured has ended; and (3) whether the Authorization for Use of Military Force authorizes, and the Constitution permits, detention of an individual who was not “engaged in an armed conflict against the United States” in Afghanistan prior to his capture.
- 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.
- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. Whether a state, consistent with the 14th Amendment, may require an ultrasound as part of informed consent at least 18 hours before an abortion.
More Petitions »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 70

Cases decided 32

Summary reversals 4

Merits cases granted to date 73

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Merits Docket OT18 (May 20, 2019)
Merits Cases by Sitting
Majority Opinions by Author
Voting Breakdown Argued Cases
Majority Lineup 5-4 Decisions

Full Calendar Submit Event

Orders/Opinions
Arguments
Conferences

Events
Holidays
Multiple

Download our App in the Apple Store
Videos see all

Justice Thomas at Pepperdine Law School

On March 30, Justice Clarence Thomas spoke with former clerk Brittney Lane Kubisch and Pepperdine University President-elect James Gash at Pepperdine University School of Law. Thomas told the audience that he had no plans to retire from the Supreme Court.

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	70
Cases decided	32
Summary reversals	4
Merits cases granted to date	73

9
Conference

13
Orders
Opinions

16
Conference

20
Orders
Opinions

23
Conference

30
Conference