How Appealing



Monday, March 15, 2021

“In Paulina v. Leontes, Breyer presides over a trial inspired by the Bard”: Angie Gou has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

Posted at 9:12 PM by Howard Bashman



“Colorado Supreme Court rules Democrats acted unconstitutionally when they used computers to speed-read bills; High court rules 4-3 in favor of GOP in fight over measure used to combat delay tactic”: Alex Burness of The Denver Post has this report.

Jesse Paul of The Colorado Sun reports that “Colorado Supreme Court confirms that Democrats’ speed-reading of bills violated state constitution; The situation arose from Republicans’ efforts to stall the lawmaking process in protest of Democratic policies.”

Marianne Goodland of Colorado Politics has a report headlined “State Supreme Court: Senate Dems violated Constitution in speed-reading a bill, but District Court Judge went ‘too far’ in ruling.”

And Amanda Pampuro of Courthouse News Service reports that “‘Cacophony’ of Computers Doesn’t Count as Bill Reading for Colorado High Court; A split Colorado Supreme Court found computers can’t be used to speed-read through proposed legislation as the state constitution requires.”

You can access today’s 4-to-3 ruling of the Supreme Court of Colorado at this link.

Posted at 7:45 PM by Howard Bashman



“Not all the misconduct allegations in a Colorado Judicial Department memo are as serious as implied; Interviews offer a clearer explanation behind the misdeeds that were allegedly covered up”: David Migoya of The Denver Post has this report.

Posted at 7:15 PM by Howard Bashman



“Washington State Shows How a Truly Progressive Court Changes Everything; Joe Biden should look the state’s diverse and courageous Supreme Court when making nominations to the federal bench”: Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.

Posted at 5:34 PM by Howard Bashman



Siding with the majority view on an existing circuit split, Eleventh Circuit holds that a represented party’s pro se motion for a new trial, later stricken as improper, sufficed to extend the time to file a notice of appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4): The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued this revised decision Friday.

The same three-judge panel reached the same result in its original decision, which issued in early February 2021. Because the party that was seeking to dismiss the appeal as jurisdictionally improper won the appeal on the merits, this case does not present a vehicle for obtaining U.S. Supreme Court review of the question of appellate jurisdiction that is the subject of this circuit split.

Posted at 4:08 PM by Howard Bashman



“Appeals court hears UO professor’s pay inequality case”: C. Francis O’Leary of The Daily Emerald, the student newspaper of the University of Oregon, had this article back in May 2020.

And Gina Scalpone of Eugene Weekly had an article headlined “Appealing on Zoom: UO gender discrimination case argued in Ninth Circuit.”

Today, a partially divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued this decision reversing the district court’s entry of summary judgment against several of the professor’s claims. Circuit Judge Lawrence J. VanDyke issued an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Posted at 3:18 PM by Howard Bashman



“Are the Elite Supreme Court Advocates Better — or Just Better Known?” Ross Guberman has this post at The Juris Lab.

Posted at 3:05 PM by Howard Bashman



“Supreme Court’s COVID-19 cases stir up battle between religion, same-sex couples over foster care”: John Fritze of USA Today has this report.

Posted at 1:48 PM by Howard Bashman



“Justice Breyer Should Retire Right Now; If he doesn’t, Democrats run the very real risk that they would be unable to replace him”: Law professor Paul F. Campos has this essay online at The New York Times.

Posted at 1:33 PM by Howard Bashman



“Should Lady Justice be Blind to Identity When Judges Are Selected? A Response to Professor McGinnis.” Eric Segall has this blog post at “Dorf on Law.”

Posted at 1:23 PM by Howard Bashman



“The split decision in June Medical did not overrule the precedential effect of Whole Woman’s Health and Casey.” So ruled the majority on a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Friday in deciding the case of Planned Parenthood v. Box on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Circuit Judge David F. Hamilton‘s majority opinion explained:

The Chief Justice’s concurring opinion in June Medical offered the narrowest basis for the judgment in that case, giving stare decisis effect to Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 136 S. Ct. 2292 (2016), on the essentially identical facts in June Medical. The Marks rule does not, however, turn everything the concurrence said — including its stated reasons for disagreeing with portions of the plurality opinion — into binding precedent that effectively overruled Whole Woman’s Health. That is not how Marks works. It does not allow dicta in a non-majority opinion to overrule an otherwise binding precedent

Circuit Judge Michael S. Kanne issued a dissenting opinion in which he disagreed with the majority’s understanding and application of the June Medical ruling.

Posted at 11:37 AM by Howard Bashman



Former USDOJ Capital Case Section attorney’s defamation suit against The New York Times was properly dismissed under New York’s fair report privilege, Second Circuit holds: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued this decision today.

The suit concerned an article by Katie Benner that appeared in the April 1, 2018 issue of The New York Times headlined “At the Justice Dept.’s Death Penalty Unit, Accusations of Favoritism, Gender Bias and Unwanted Groping.”

Posted at 10:42 AM by Howard Bashman



“The sweeping implications of the Supreme Court’s new union-busting case: Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid isn’t just an attack on unions, it could bar health inspectors from inspecting restaurants.” Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.

Posted at 10:14 AM by Howard Bashman



In the March 22, 2021 issue of The New Yorker: Andrew Solomon has an article headlined “How Polyamorists and Polygamists Are Challenging Family Norms: From opposite sides of the culture, parallel campaigns for legal recognition may soon make multiple-partner marriages as unremarkable as same-sex marriages.”

And Jane Mayer has an article headlined “Can Cyrus Vance, Jr., Nail Trump? Insiders say that the Manhattan District Attorney’s investigation has dramatically intensified since the former President left office; ‘It’s like night and day,’ says one; According to another, ‘They mean business.’

Posted at 10:12 AM by Howard Bashman