Live blog of orders and opinions | June 27, 2016
-
If AMK is the only vote to vacate and remand rather than to reverse, then RBG would presumably write the most dramatic opinion for herself, EK, and SGB voting to reverse -- Larry Tribe
-
Here are the orders. Court noted probable jurisdiction in McCrory v. Harris, and granted cert. in two mores.
-
And then a pauper case: Beckles v. United States. Kagan recused.
-
John Elwood discussed Beckles in Relist Watch last week. Andrew will link to it in a second.
-
The court noted probable jurisdiction because it is a voting rights case, where it is an appeal from a three-judge panel.
-
There are several GVRs in light of some of the Court's recent decisions in cases like Universal Health v. Escobar, Utah v. Strieff, and Cuozzo v.Speed technologies.
-
The Court also denied the petition for rehearing in Hawkins v. Community Bank, one of the term's 4-4 summary affirmances. The petition was relisted a number of times, then denied today without comment.
-
The Court denied review in Midland Funding v. Madden, a case about the scope of National Bank Act preemption. The SG had recommended denial; Goldstein & Russell was among the counsel to the respondents in the case.
-
There do not appear to be any per curiam opinions (i.e., summary reversals) attached to the order list today. Lots of attorney discipline, though, if anyone is interested.
-
What does the Plaza look like today? Thousands waiting for Whole Woman?
-
Did I miss the box count? Expect everything today?
-
can the court punt any of the three remaining cases into the next term? if so, what is the mechanism for doing that?
-
How long did it take for the Court to deny the rehearing n Hawkins v. Community Bank? Do you think it actually makes it less likely govt files a rehearing in immigration case? Not sure what they have to lose in filing anyway...
-
The Court could ask for re-argument, as they did in Brown v. Board of
Education back in 1953, right? -
Do we expect another set of orders tomorrow? Will that be the last (excepting capital cases etc.) until the fall?
-
Kevin - has the Court ever noted probable jurisdiction and then decided, on further review, that it does *not* have jurisdiction? If not, shouldn't the Court just say that it noted jurisdiction and get rid of probability?
-
Why do they issue two sets of orders that presumably come out of one conference? In other words: Why is this week different from all other weeks?
-
Has there ever been a decision so split that every Justice wrote their own opinion?
-
Extremely shallow question: Are they in robes on decision days?
-
This is worse than the day I was going to deliver my children! How ironic!
-
Did the justice grant the request for re-hearing in Friedrichs?
-
A huge thanks to Lyle for all the hard work over the years. I've been following the blog for about 6 years now, and it's been wonderful, and I've learned so much over the years from everyone, especially Lyle and his thoughtful, reasoned, layman-oriented coverage. You shall be missed. #thankyoulyle #waitingforlyleonelasttime
-
The Pentagon Papers case had nine opinions, with a 6-3 result.
-
So does this mean there will be another trial for him? Or can the gov't decide not to pursue this?
-
" Setting up a meeting, talking to another official... without more, does not meet that definition of official act."
Would this be relevant in a case where someone like former IL Gov. Rod Blagojevich talked about seeking a bribe but never did it? -
Is harmlessness of error in jury instructions typically reviewed with a beyond a readonate doubt standard of revew?
-
Sorry if I missed this but I didn't see anything about Tibbs?
Submit Event
