“Ruling striking down parts of Alabama’s abortion consent law for minors upheld”: Howard Koplowitz of Alabama Media Group has this report.
And Erik De La Garza of Courthouse News Service reports that “11th Circuit Finds Alabama’s Abortion Consent Bypass Law Unconstitutional; A three-judge panel found the challenged provisions are unconstitutional because they present substantial obstacles to a minor’s right to an abortion, while providing ‘incremental benefits at best.’”
You can access today’s per curiam ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.
“Federal judge blocks Indiana ‘abortion reversal’ law”: Christopher Rickett of The Indianapolis Star has this report.
Tom Davies of The Associated Press reports that “Federal judge blocks Indiana ‘abortion reversal’ law.”
And David Wells of Courthouse News Service reports that “Indiana ‘Abortion Reversal’ Law Blocked by Federal Judge; The controversial law would have forced providers to tell patients receiving medication abortions that the procedure could be halted.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana at this link.
“Louisiana Supreme Court justice admits misconduct; here’s how his colleagues disciplined him”: John Simerman and Andrea Gallo of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans have this report.
And Kevin McGill of The Associated Press reports that “Louisiana high court censures one of its own.”
“I fought for years in court for my basic rights as a trans kid. It shouldn’t have been this hard.” Gavin Grimm has this essay online at The Washington Post.
“Biden’s 9th Circuit Pick Has Union Support, Labor Law Chops”: Robert Iafolla of Bloomberg Law has this report.
“Experts Debate Reducing the Supreme Court’s Power to Strike Down Laws; In its first public hearing with witnesses, President Biden’s reform commission largely stayed away from the idea of expanding the court”: Charlie Savage of The New York Times has this report.
And Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Biden’s Supreme Court commission pushes for judicial term limits.”
“Stephen Breyer is making a strong case for Supreme Court term limits”: Columnist Paul Waldman has this essay online at The Washington Post.
“Supreme Court Backs Pipeline in Case on New Jersey Land Seizures; By a 5-to-4 vote, the court said the federal government could delegate its power to condemn state property to a private company”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.
In today’s edition of The Washington Post, Robert Barnes has an article headlined “Supreme Court rules against immigrants claiming safety fears after deportation and for pipeline builders.”
In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has an article headlined “Supreme Court rules some immigrants facing deportation can be held without bail.”
And in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Brent Kendall and Timothy Puko have an article headlined “Supreme Court Rules New Jersey Can’t Block Natural-Gas Pipeline; Court says pipeline developer can invoke federal eminent domain power to acquire state property.” In addition, Jess Bravin has an article headlined “Supreme Court Rules Noncitizens Who Re-Enter U.S. Illegally Must Be Held; Majority rules that repeat violators can’t seek bail during asylum proceedings.”
“Bill Cosby is free; Ghislaine Maxwell should be, too”: David Oscar Markus has this essay online at The New York Daily News.
“All About Amy (Chua), The Law Professor We Can’t Stop Talking About; I read five articles and 20,000 words about the Tiger Mother, so you don’t have to”: David Lat has this post at his “Original Jurisdiction” Substack site.
I previously linked to three of those five articles. Here are the other two. Earlier this month, Lizzie Widdicombe had a post online at The New Yorker titled “What Is Going On at Yale Law School? The prestigious institution has tied itself in knots over a dispute involving one of its most popular — and controversial — professors, Amy Chua.”
And on Monday, Bloomberg Law columnist Vivia Chen had an essay titled “On Amy Chua, Yale Law and the Cauldron of Nonsense: She’s brash, flashy, and vocal, but could gender and race expectations factor in how she’s treated and perceived?“
“The Most Fascinating ConLaw Decision of the Term: PennEast Pipeline v. New Jersey; The non-curious/curious caucus divide.” Josh Blackman has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”
“Assignments Aimed at ‘Requiring a Statement’ of Ideological Belief from Students May Violate First Amendment”: Eugene Volokh has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy” about an interesting decision that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued yesterday.
“Bill Cosby’s conviction overturned by Pa. Supreme Court; The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has overturned Bill Cosby’s 2019 sexual assault conviction and barred a retrial in the case”: Jeremy Roebuck of The Philadelphia Inquirer has this report.
Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania consists of a majority opinion, a concurring and dissenting opinion, and a dissenting opinion.
“Professor Toby Heytens Nominated to Fourth Circuit; Two Other Alumni Tapped for Federal Judgeships”: Mary Wood of the University of Virginia School of Law has this report.
“Biden announces 5th wave of judicial nominees as Democrats aim to maintain quick pace of confirmations to federal bench”: Phil Mattingly of CNN has this report.
This morning the White House issued a news release titled “President Biden Names Fifth Round of Judicial Nominees.”
“Remembering a Judge Who Wrote With Empathy”: Online at Bloomberg Law, law professor Jonah Perlin has an essay that begins, “The nation has lost one of its finest and most respected jurists, Judge Robert Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.”
Congratulations to Rick Hasen on his newly redesigned “Election Law Blog”: You can see the new design via this link.
“Schools Weigh Discipline After Supreme Court Ruling on Student Speech; Court says most off-campus speech online is protected, but the bar for punishable social-media behavior remains blurry”: Yoree Koh and Ray A. Smith of The Wall Street Journal have this report.
“Supreme Court allows coronavirus eviction moratorium to remain in place”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report on a 5-to-4 order that the U.S. Supreme Court issued this evening.
“Oklahoma Bar Sees Constitutional Challenge to Dues Reinstated”: Holly Barker of Bloomberg Law has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued today.
“En banc 4th Circ adopts lower bar for child asylum applicants”: Daniel Wiessner of Reuters has this report on a 9-to-6 en banc ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued today.
First Circuit agrees that the plaintiffs lack standing in lawsuit seeking to establish that the Equal Rights Amendment is now part of the U.S. Constitution: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit at this link.
“The Seventh Circuit and Appeal Extensions for Excusable Neglect; The Seventh Circuit recognized its caselaw on reviewing Rule 4(a)(5)(A) excusable-neglect determinations is ‘messy,’ and future cases might present some hard questions”: Bryan Lammon has this post at his “final decisions” blog discussing a per curiam decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.
“Repudiating Roe (Part I): The Most Important Abortion Case in Thirty Years.” Law professor Michael Stokes Paulsen has this essay online at Public Discourse.
“Breyer Watch Comes to Crescendo as Justices End Term July 1”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson of Bloomberg Law has this report (subscription required for full access).
“What’s Dividing the Supreme Court’s Conservatives? Kavanaugh and Barrett appear to understand the importance of George Floyd. Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch don’t appear to care.” Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.
“Supreme Court defies critics with wave of unanimous decisions; Chief Justice John Roberts is credited with fostering consensus on high court”: Devin Dwyer of ABC News has a report that begins, “The opening term of the most conservative Supreme Court in a generation was supposed to bring an eruption of pent-up ideological rage. Instead, it’s closing with astonishing bonhomie.”
“The Supreme Court will issue its final opinions of the term Thursday. Here are the two major cases.” Ariane de Vogue and Chandelis Duster of CNN have this report.
Access today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court issued rulings in three argued cases.
1. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 20-440. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion. And Justice Amy Coney Barrett issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
2. Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court (except as to a single footnote) in Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, No. 19-897. Justice Thomas issued an opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined, concurring in all but a single footnote and concurring in the judgment. And Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
3. And Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court in PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey, No. 19-1039. Justice Gorsuch issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined. And Justice Barrett issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Thomas, Kagan, and Gorsuch joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
“Fulton‘s Revival of Religious Exemptions; Smith remains good law; Yet Fulton appears to have rewritten its meaning”: Seana Sugrue has this post at the “Law & Liberty” blog.
“The Devil and Garry Wills”: Kevin D. Williamson has this post online at National Review.
“Supreme Court revives lawsuit alleging excessive force in death of man cuffed and shackled”: Robert Barnes and Ann E. Marimow have this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.
In today’s edition of The Los Angeles Times, David G. Savage has an article headlined “Supreme Court orders lower courts to review St. Louis police use-of-force case.”
In today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall have an article headlined “Supreme Court Revives Wrongful Death Suit Against St. Louis Police; Justices also sidestep cases on work-from-home taxes, marijuana.”
John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court returns St. Louis excessive force case involving death in jail to lower court.”
In today’s edition of The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Joel Currier has an article headlined “Supreme Court ruling revives lawsuit over man’s death in St. Louis police holding cell.”
Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press reports that “Supreme Court revives St. Louis police in-custody death case.”
Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley of Reuters report that “U.S. Supreme Court revives excessive-force suit against St. Louis police.”
Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court lets lawsuit continue in death of man detained in prone position.”
Ariane de Vogue of CNN reports that “Supreme Court revives case about man’s death in police custody.”
Josh Gerstein of Politico reports that “Justices object as Supreme Court turns back police abuse case; Three high court members fault colleagues for being ‘unwilling’ to make tough call on suit brought over use of ‘prone restraint.’”
And Alexandra Jones of Courthouse News Service reports that “High Court Revives Excessive Force Case Against St. Louis Police; The Supreme Court vacated a ruling that found officers acted appropriately in restraining an inmate who died and sent the case back to the Eighth Circuit.”
“Breyer watch intensifies as Supreme Court term nears its close”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.
“3rd Circ. Asks Pa. Justices To Take Up Device Liability Row”: Matt Fair of Law360 has this report (subscription required for access) on last Thursday’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit certifying two important but unresolved issues of Pennsylvania law to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania for resolution.
I am appellate counsel for the plaintiff-appellant in this case and am quoted in the article.
“Supreme Court Acts in Cases on Transgender Rights and Excessive Force; In both cases, some of the most conservative justices signaled frustration with the court’s cautious approach to divisive issues”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Robert Barnes and Hannah Natanson of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court will not hear transgender bathroom rights dispute, a win for Va. student who sued his school for discrimination.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “In win for transgender student, Supreme Court refuses to hear case on bathroom ban.”
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Declines to Consider Transgender Bathroom Case; Lower-court victories remain in place for Gavin Grimm, who was denied access to the boys’ bathroom by his Virginia high school.”
John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court declines to hear Virginia school board’s transgender bathroom case.”
Valerie Richardson and Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times report that “Conservatives frustrated by Supreme Court’s repeated refusals to take up transgender cases; High court declines to grant writ of certiorari in victory for LGBTQ movement.”
Peter Dujardin of The Daily Press of Newport News, Virginia reports that “Gavin Grimm’s yearslong transgender rights battle against Gloucester ends in ‘enormous victory.’”
Denise Lavoie and Mark Sherman of The Associated Press report that “Supreme Court won’t revive school’s transgender bathroom ban.”
Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Transgender student wins as U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs bathroom appeal.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Transgender Boy Wins Bathroom Fight as Top Court Spurns Case.”
Pete Williams of NBC News reports that “Supreme Court won’t hear dispute over bathrooms for transgender students; Monday’s order denying review in the case means Gavin Grimm’s victory in the lower courts remains intact.”
Ariane de Vogue and Chandelis Duster of CNN report that “Supreme Court gives victory to transgender student who sued to use bathroom.”
Bianca Quilantan of Politico reports that “Supreme Court passes on transgender bathroom challenge; The Supreme Court’s decision is seen as a major victory for transgender student rights, especially as a number of conservative states pass laws to challenge them.”
John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court won’t hear school’s appeal in transgender bathroom access fight.”
And Brad Kutner of Courthouse News Service reports that “High Court Paves Way for Transgender-Inclusive Bathroom Policies in School.”
And on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “The Supreme Court Leaves A Transgender Student’s Legal Victory Intact.”
