“Trudeau nominates Ontario judge Mahmud Jamal to Supreme Court of Canada”: Sean Fine of The Globe and Mail of Toronto has this report.
And Tonda MacCharles of The Toronto Star reports that “Mahmud Jamal becomes the first person of colour appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada.”
“Supreme Court Backs Catholic Agency in Case on Gay Rights and Foster Care; The unanimous ruling was further evidence that claims of religious liberty almost always prevail in the current court”: Adam Liptak will have this front page article in Friday’s edition of The New York Times.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court unanimously rules for Catholic group in Philadelphia foster-care dispute.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court rules for Catholic foster care agency in Philadelphia, citing discrimination.”
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Exempts Catholic Foster-Care Agency From Nondiscrimination Law; Catholic Social Services is entitled to city contract despite Philadelphia ordinance requiring contractors to treat same-sex couples equally, court rules.”
John Fritze of USA Today has an article headlined “Religious freedom vs. LGBTQ rights: Supreme Court sides with Catholic foster care agency.”
Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court sides with Catholic Social Services in foster care, LGBT battle.”
Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press has a report headlined “Another victory at the Supreme Court for religious groups.”
Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley of Reuters report that “U.S. Supreme Court backs Catholic group that shunned gay foster parents.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “U.S. High Court Backs Catholic Group Over Gay Foster-Care Rights.”
Jeremy Roebuck and Julia Terruso of The Philadelphia Inquirer report that “The Supreme Court ruled against Philly in its fight with a Catholic foster group but may not have ended the dispute; The ruling called the city’s 2018 move to end its foster contract with Catholic Social Services unconstitutional; But the question of what to do about it split the court.”
John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court unanimously sides with Catholic adoption agency that turned away same-sex couples.”
Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News reports that “The Supreme Court Ruled Against LGBTQ Families In A Big Religious Freedom Case; The court sided with a Catholic agency that wouldn’t place foster kids with same-sex couples, but rejected a request to issue a broader ruling on nondiscrimination policies.”
Alexandra Jones of Courthouse News Service reports that “Supreme Court Says Philadelphia Can’t Cut Ties With Catholic Foster Care Group; Philadelphia shredded its contract with a foster care agency that doesn’t place children with gay couples, but the Supreme Court found Thursday that it was the city that discriminated.”
On this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Supreme Court Rules Catholic Group Doesn’t Have To Consider LGBTQ Foster Parents.”
In commentary, Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal will contain an editorial titled “One Cheer for the Supreme Court on Religious Liberty; A narrow ruling helps Catholic foster parents, but the faithful deserve more protection under the First Amendment.”
Online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “John Roberts Just Pulled Off His Greatest Judicial Magic Trick.”
And online at Bloomberg Opinion, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Supreme Court’s 9-0 Ruling on Gay Foster Parents Divides Justices; A unanimous ruling on a case affecting LGBT rights doesn’t show the court is united on religious liberty exemptions; Actually, it shows the opposite.”
“Janet Malcolm, Provocative Journalist With a Piercing Eye, Dies at 86; Her subjects ranged widely, but she took special aim at journalism itself, writing that every journalist ‘knows that what he does is morally indefensible'”: Katharine Q. Seelye of The New York Times has written this obituary.
“Affordable Care Act Survives Latest Supreme Court Challenge; The court sidestepped the larger issue in the case, whether the 2010 health care law can stand without a provision that required most Americans to obtain insurance or pay a penalty”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Affordable Care Act survives third Supreme Court challenge, as case from GOP-led states and endorsed by Trump administration is rejected.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court saves Obamacare again, rejecting GOP challenge from Texas.”
Brent Kendall, Jess Bravin, and Stephanie Armour of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Leaves Affordable Care Act Intact; The high court preserves the 2010 healthcare law, the signature legislative accomplishment of the Obama administration.”
John Fritze and Richard Wolf of USA Today report that “Supreme Court turns back Obamacare challenge, allowing individual coverage mandate to stand.”
Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has an article headlined “‘Obamacare’ survives: Supreme Court dismisses big challenge.”
Robert T. Garrett of The Dallas Morning News reports that “Texas loses again as Supreme Court dismisses multi-state challenge to Obama health law; Texas AG Ken Paxton insists he will keep fighting the law even after the court ruled 7-2 to keep it intact, reversing lower court opinions.”
Benjamin Wermund of The Houston Chronicle reports that “Supreme Court upholds Affordable Care Act, tossing Texas challenge.”
Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has this report on the ruling.
Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court rejects Trump-backed challenge to Obamacare.”
Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Supreme Court Rejects GOP Challenge to Affordable Care Act.”
Susannah Luthi and Josh Gerstein of Politico report that “Supreme Court tosses lawsuit challenging Obamacare; The justices found that a group of red states lacked legal standing to bring a challenge that could have upended the health care law.”
John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court upholds ObamaCare in 7-2 ruling.”
Todd Ruger of Roll Call reports that “Supreme Court tosses out major Obamacare challenge; Affordable Care Act survives its third challenge at the high court.”
Paul McLeod and Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed News report that “The Supreme Court Saved Obamacare Again By Throwing Out A Republican Lawsuit; The 7–2 decision saw justices nominated by Donald Trump join with the court’s liberals.”
Karen Brooks Harper of The Texas Tribune reports that “Supreme Court tosses Texas-led Affordable Care Act challenge, preserving sweeping health care law; The 7-2 ruling said the plaintiffs didn’t have standing to sue over the law; The court’s ruling did not include an official opinion on whether the law, commonly known as Obamacare, was constitutional.”
Brandi Buchman of Courthouse News Service has a report headlined “Texas, Who? High Court Quashes Challenge to Health Care Law; Backing the law still cheekily called Obamacare for the third time, the Supreme Court saw its conservative justices sharply divided on whether Texas and other state challengers have standing.”
On today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Obamacare Wins For The 3rd Time At The Supreme Court.”
In commentary, Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal will contain an editorial headlined “The ObamaCare Massacre That Wasn’t; So much for all those alarums about Justice Amy Coney Barrett.”
And online at Bloomberg Opinion, law professor Noah Feldman has an essay titled “Supreme Court’s ACA Ruling Is a Win for Common Sense; Obamacare lives again, this time in a 7-2 ruling that rejects an embarrassing argument lodged by 13 conservative states.”
“‘Pure insanity’: How Trump and his allies pressured the Justice Department to help overturn the election; New documents and emails reveal how far the president and his supporters were willing to go to try to keep Donald Trump in office in a frenzied three-week stretch that tested Justice Department leaders.” Matt Zapotosky, Rosalind S. Helderman, Amy Gardner, and Karoun Demirjian have this front page article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.
“Activists, academics step up pressure on Justice Breyer to retire”: Robert Barnes has this article in today’s edition of The Washington Post.
“Federal appeals court sharply questions legality of Maryland’s ‘broadcast ban’ on court proceedings”: Justin Fenton of The Baltimore Sun has this report.
Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has a post titled “Journalists win as 4th Circuit orders redo in challenge to Md. trial-tape ban.”
And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Eugene Volokh has a post titled “Ban on Broadcasting Court’s Own Recordings of Criminal Hearings Likely Unconstitutional; The Fourth Circuit holds that Maryland’s ban must be subject to strict scrutiny, a test that the prohibition is highly unlikely to satisfy.”
You can access Tuesday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.
“Obamacare’s Win at the Supreme Court Is Even Bigger Than it Appears”: Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“The Truth Teller of the Supreme Court”: Columnist Linda Greenhouse has this essay online at The New York Times.
Access today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court issued rulings in three argued cases.
1. Justice Stephen G. Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court in California v. Texas, No. 19-840. Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion. And Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Neil M. Gorsuch joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
2. Justice Thomas announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court in part in Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe, No. 19-416. Justice Gorsuch issued a concurring opinion in which Justice Alito joined in one part and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh joined in another part. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. And Justice Alito issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.
3. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court in Fulton v. Philadelphia, No. 19-123. Justice Amy Coney Barrett issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Kavanaugh joined in full and Justice Breyer joined except for its first paragraph. Justice Alito issued an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justices Thomas and Gorsuch joined. And Justice Gorsuch issued an opinion concurring in the judgment in which Justices Thomas and Alito joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.
“Obamacare, LGBTQ rights, voting laws in play during Supreme Court’s final weeks”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to issue one or more rulings in argued cases starting at 10 a.m. eastern time today.
Registration is now open for the 2021 Appellate Judges Education Institute Summit in Austin, Texas: The event will occur from November 11 to 14, 2021. I am planning to attend, and I hope to see you there!
You can learn more about the event and register to attend via this link.