Hi there, this is Laura from Casetext, I'm a longtime fan of SCOTUSblog and I'm honored (and a little shocked, frankly) that the team is letting me join today. Here's what I really want to know: are there any betting pools on which opinions will be coming down which days? Maybe someone can get creative and do this March Madness style?
Five-minute buzzer just sounded. I am so excited.
Okay, going in to wait for opinions. Back soon.
We have the first decision, from Justice Kavanaugh.
It is Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck.
The Court holds that Manhattan Neighborhood Network, which operates a public access channel in Manhattan, is not a state actor subject to the First Amendment.
The Second Circuit is reversed "in relevant part," and the court sends the case back for further proceedings consistent with their opinion.
The vote is 5-4. Sotomayor dissents, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan.
This was a case in which the public-access channel was sued after it suspended two people who produced a film that was critical of the channel from access to the channel's facilities and services.
Justice Kavanaugh emphasizes that the First Amendment's prohibitions apply only to state (governmental) actors and concludes that the threshold requirement of state action is missing here.
Kavanaugh writes that the producers' main argument is that the channel was exercising a "traditional, exclusive public function when it operates the public access channels on Time Warner's cable system in Manhattan." "We disagree," he says.
At first blush, it is the opposite lineup some might expect -- the conservatives finding that the First Amendment has no application, with the liberals voting the other way -- given talk about conservatives "weaponizing" the First Amendment to limit control regulation of communications businesses. (On the other hand, the end result here is limiting suits against a communications enterprise).
Going in for the next one
We have, at long last, Virginia Uranium v. Warren. The judgment of the Fourth Circuit is affirmed, but the vote is complicated.
Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Thomas and Justice Kavanaugh, holds that the federal Atomic Energy Act does not preempt a Virginia law banning uranium mining altogether.
Ginsburg has an opinion concurring in the judgment, which is joined by Sotomayor and Kagan.
Roberts dissents, joined by Breyer and Alito.
We have Gamble v. United States. From Alito, and the Eleventh Circuit is affirmed.
Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan object mostly to the plurality decisions reasoning -- mainly its discussion of the perils of inquiring into legislative intent and perceived departures from settled obstacle preemption doctrine.
The Court declines to overturn the longstanding "dual sovereignty" doctrine, which allows two sovereigns -- for example, state and local governments -- to prosecute someone for the same conduct.
Submit Event
