Live blog of orders and opinions | May 22, 2017
3rd & 7 37yd
3rd & 7 37yd
B
S
O
close
close

-





-
Here are our "Petitions to Watch" for last week's conference. Orders very soon. www.scotusblog.com
-
Hope everyone had a great weekend. We are expecting orders from last Thursday's conference at 9:30 am. There are a bunch of interesting cases on which the justices could act today (although for some of those we have been saying that for MONTHS, literally), so I can't wait to see what we get!
-
Lots of you are, I know, waiting on Peruta v. California, in which the Court has been asked to decide whether there is a Second Amendment right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense.
-
Is Masterpiece Cakeshop likely to be denied? Are we just waiting for the justices to author dissents from denial?
-
Sessions v. Morales-Santana is the only case from November that has yet to be ruled on and it appears that Ginsburg will be writing this opinion.
-
The Court has granted one new case, SAS Institute v. Lee.
-
It's a patent case, and here is the question presented: Whether 35 U.S.C. § 318(a), which provides that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review “shall issue a final written decision with respect to the patentability of any patent claim challenged by the petitioner,” requires that Board to issue a final written decision as to every claim challenged by the petitioner, or whether it allows that Board to issue a final written decision with respect to the patentability of only some of the patent claims challenged by the petitioner, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held.
-
All of the Multistate Tax Compact cases have been denied.
-
Justice Alito did not participate in the Multistate Tax Compact cases.
-
No action on Peruta v. California or Masterpiece Cake Shop.
-
I fell asleep halfway through the description of that case
-
Here is a link to all of this morning's orders: www.supremecourt.gov
-
The court also does not appear to have acted on the group of cases challenging the government's obtaining cell-site data (that is, where a cell phone connects with a cell tower) without a warrant, nor does it appear to have acted on Sessions v. Binderup, a Second Amendment challenge by two men to the bar on possession of guns by a felon as it applies to them.
-
The Court also summarily affirmed the decision in Republican Party of Louisiana v. FEC, a challenge to the ban on "soft money" in elections.
-
Interestingly, Justices Thomas and Gorsuch would have noted probable jurisdiction and set the soft-money case for oral argument.
-
In order to understand the likely outcome of Dimaya, look to Kennedy's comment in a later case (Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions) in which he stated: Why does the INS have any expertise in determining the meaning of a criminal statute?”
-
Thank you for the timely information! See you next week. Ed and Rachel
-
How many times has Peruta been pushed to the next conference?
-
This is the second time the Court has not made a decision on APRI v. Husted (16-980), which concerns the National Voter Registration ("Motor Voter") Act. Not sure if that constitutes a "re-list."
-
Will we get Gorsuch's first opinion today? Here's Steve Wermiel on justices' first opinions. www.scotusblog.com
-
The obscure news here is that Abbot & Costello's "Who's on First" comedy routine may now be in public domain thanks to cert denial in TCA Television v. Kevin McCollum
-
Do you know if a petition for writ of certiorari has been filed in a 7th Circuit case called Janus v. AFSCME?
-
Any info on how Justice Gorsuch is getting on with the careteria committee? How are his door answering skills?
-
While we're waiting, a question: If Comedy Central did a SCOTUS-themed episode of "Drunk History," what cases/advocates would be good story candidates?
-
Seems like the pace of decisions is slow this term. How many are left in the pipeline before recess?
-
Turning to the merits docket, as one of our readers has noted, there is only one case left from the November sitting: Sessions (formerly Lynch) v. Morales-Santana, and I believe that Justice Ginsburg is the only justice who has not yet written for November.
-
Morales-Santana is pretty squarely in Ginsburg's wheelhouse: it is a challenge to a federal law that imposes different requirements for citizenship depending on whether your U.S.-citizen parent is your mother or father. Ruth Bader Ginsburg does not like those kinds of gender-based distinctions.
-
any sense why Justice Alito would not participate in the MTC cases?
-
The first opinion of the day is in the North Carolina redistricting case Cooper v. Harris.
-
Here is a link to the decision in Cooper v. Harris. Amy Howe will have our analysis. www.supremecourt.gov
-
This is a case in which a three-judge district court ruled that NC officials violated the bar on using race as the predominant factor in drawing district lines without a compelling reason when they created two districts with majority-black voting-age populations. The Court today affirmed that ruling.
-
Kagan, Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and.....Thomas? That's not a combo you see much
-
Although States enjoy leeway to take race-based
actions reasonably judged necessary under a proper interpretation
of the VRA, that latitude cannot rescue District
1. We by no means “insist that a state legislature, when
redistricting, determine precisely what percent minority
population [§2 of the VRA] demands.” Ibid. But neither
will we approve a racial gerrymander whose necessity is
supported by no evidence and whose raison d’être is a legal mistake. -
Moving on to the next decision, on this rainy day, the next case is Watersplash v. Menon, by Justice Alito. It is a unanimous decision.
-
The court rules that the Hague Service Convention, which deals with the service of documents overseas, does not prohibit service of process by mail.
-
Here is a link to the opinion in Water Splash v. Menon. Charlotte Garden will have our analysis. www.supremecourt.gov
-
The third and final opinion of the day comes from Justice Thomas, in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods. It is about the appropriate venue for patent cases.
-
It is unanimous except for Gorsuch, who did not participate.
-
Here is a link to the opinion in TC Heartland. Ronald Mann will have our analysis. www.supremecourt.gov
-
The court reverses and remands, holding that a domestic corporation only "resides" in its state of incorporation for purposes of the patent venue statute.
-
Interesting in Cooper v. Harris that Justice Thomas had the opinion assignment and gave it to Justice Kagan.
-
Excellent literary back and forth bw Kagan & Alito in the footnotes - Alito citing "Hamlet," Kagan "Inherit the Wind."
-
I'm going to sign off right now and get to work. Thanks so much for joining us, and hope to "see" you next Tuesday. Have a great week!
-
I am confused on Peruta. If they decide to takeup the case next month, do they have enough time for arguments, briefs, analysis and decision by this end of term? Or do they kick it to October?
-
The only remaining case from the December term is now Jennings v. Rodriguez, another immigration case, and Roberts has yet to write an opinion for that session.
-
Hello all. I'm an avid lay observer of SCOTUS & particularly keen on thoughts about whether Justice Gorsuch will write an opinion this term.Thanx