How Appealing



Wednesday, June 23, 2021

“The Supreme Court’s conservative majority returns to its passion project”: Columnist Ruth Marcus has this essay online at The Washington Post.

Posted at 9:55 PM by Howard Bashman



“Supreme Court Rules Against Union Recruiting on California Farms; The case concerned a unique state regulation allowing labor representatives to meet with farm workers at their workplaces for up to three hours a day for as many as 120 days a year”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court strikes down Calif. regulation allowing union access to farmworkers on growers’ land.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Rules Against Union Organizers’ Access to California Farms; The decision erases a crowning achievement of César Chavez’s farmworker movement.”

John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court rules against labor in private property case, barring access for organizing.”

Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press reports that “High court backs businesses challenging California labor law.”

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court limits union power in farm-access ruling.”

Erin Mulvaney and Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News report that “Supreme Court Rules Against Unions on California Farm Access.”

Alexandra Jones of Courthouse News Service reports that “California Farms Win Challenge of Union-Organizing Law; Property owners told the Supreme Court that labor drives have disrupted busy harvest operations, and that there are more suitable locations to organize somewhere where workers won’t be distracted.”

In commentary, Thursday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal will contain an editorial titled “Big Win for Property Rights; The Supreme Court puts significant limits on the government’s claims on the rights of owners.”

Joan Biskupic of CNN has a news analysis headlined “John Roberts is all business in his conservatism.”

Online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “The Supreme Court’s Latest Union-Busting Decision Goes Far Beyond California Farmworkers.”

And online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “The Supreme Court just handed down disastrous news for unions; The Court’s new union-busting decision reads like something out of Ayn Rand’s darkest fantasies.”

Posted at 8:44 PM by Howard Bashman



“‘Hot Pursuit’ Doesn’t Always Justify Entry, Supreme Court Rules; The mere flight of a person suspected of a minor crime, without more, does not allow police officers to enter homes without warrants, the court said”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court tightens, slightly, rules for police entering a home without a warrant.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “In two very different California disputes, Supreme Court affirms private property rights.”

John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court balks at automatic warrantless searches when police are in ‘hot pursuit’ for lesser crimes.”

Jessica Gresko of The Associated Press reports that “High court limits when police can enter home without warrant.”

Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “U.S. Supreme Court declines to expand police search powers.”

And Samantha Hawkins of Courthouse News Service reports that “Hot Pursuit May Still Require Warrant, High Court Rules; The government had argued that police in any kind of a chase don’t need a warrant to enter a house, regardless of whether the crime at issue is a felony or a misdemeanor.”

Posted at 8:24 PM by Howard Bashman



“Why The ‘Trump Court’ Won’t Be Like Trump: There may be more common ground among Supreme Court liberals and conservatives than many people think.” Peter S. Canellos has this essay online at Politico Magazine.

Posted at 8:10 PM by Howard Bashman



“Supreme Court Rules for Cheerleader Punished for Vulgar Snapchat Message; A Pennsylvania school district violated the First Amendment by disciplining a student for off-campus speech, the court ruled”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.

Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court sides with high school cheerleader in free-speech dispute over profane Snapchat rant.”

David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court rules student cheerleader may not be punished for vulgar social media posts.”

Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Rules for High-School Cheerleader Brandi Levy in Free-Speech Case Over Snapchat Post; In 8-1 decision, court finds school violated First Amendment by punishing student for using a vulgar word in social media.”

John Fritze of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court sides with cheerleader who wrote profane social media post slamming her school.”

Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court rules for foul-mouthed cheerleader in student free speech case.”

Jeremy Roebuck of The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that “U.S. Supreme Court sides with a cussing Pa. cheerleader in student free-speech case; While the court held that there are some instances where schools have an interest in regulating off-campus speech, like harassment or bullying, officials went too far in the case of Brandi Levy.”

Peter Hall of The Morning Call of Allentown, Pennsylvania reports that “Supreme Court sides with Schuylkill County cheerleader suspended over profane Snapchat post.”

Mark Sherman of The Associated Press reports that “Justices rule for cursing cheerleader over Snapchat post.”

Andrew Chung of Reuters reports that “Cheerleader prevails at U.S. Supreme Court in free speech case.”

Greg Stohr and Kimberly Robinson of Bloomberg News report that “Cheerleader’s Vulgarity Is Shielded in Supreme Court Speech Win.”

Josh Gerstein and Bianca Quilantan of Politico report that “Supreme Court sides with teen in speech case over Snapchat outburst; The justices’ 8-1 decision found that the First Amendment imposes broad limits on public schools’ ability to regulate off-campus speech delivered via social media.”

John Kruzel of The Hill reports that “Supreme Court backs cheerleader over school in free speech case.”

Mark Walsh of Education Week reports that “U.S. Supreme Court Rules for Student on Regulation of Off-Campus Speech.”

Jack Rodgers of Courthouse News Service reports that “Cheerleader Suspended Over Expletive-Laden Snap Prevails at High Court; The justices ruled 8-1 that a Pennsylvania school district overstepped its authority when it suspended a cheerleader over a vulgar Snapchat post.”

And on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Nina Totenberg had an audio segment titled “Supreme Court Rules Cheerleader’s F-Bombs Are Protected By The 1st Amendment.”

Posted at 1:08 PM by Howard Bashman



“Kavanaugh’s Sports Fandom Shines in Athlete-Centered Opinion”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson and Jordan S. Rubin of Bloomberg Law have this report.

Posted at 10:37 AM by Howard Bashman



Access today’s rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in argued cases: The Court issued rulings in four argued cases.

1. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court in Lange v. California, No. 20-18. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh issued a concurring opinion. Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion, in which Justice Kavanaugh joined in part, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. And Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. issued an opinion, in which Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. joined, concurring in the judgment. You can access the oral argument via this link.

2. Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court in Collins v. Yellen, No. 19-422. Justice Thomas issued a concurring opinion. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch issued an opinion concurring in part. Justice Kagan issued an opinion, ih which Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined in part, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. And Justice Sotomayor issued an opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined, concurring in part and dissenting in part. You can access the oral argument via this link.

3. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court in Mahanoy Area School Dist. v. B.L., No. 20-255. Justice Alito issued a concurring opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined. And Justice Thomas issued a dissenting opinion. You can access the oral argument via this link.

4. And Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, No. 20-107. Justice Kavanaugh issued a concurring opinion. And Justice Breyer issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sotomayor and Kagan joined. You can access the oral argument via this link.

Posted at 10:01 AM by Howard Bashman



“John Roberts: The man in the middle. Many on the right don’t like the chief justice. Others see him as protecting the institution. Is he the last bulwark against rank partisanship?” Sarah Isgur has this article in the July/August 2021 issue of Deseret Magazine.

Posted at 8:37 AM by Howard Bashman



“Trump admits he is ‘disappointed’ with Supreme Court judges he picked who voted to back Obamacare; The ex-president also lashed out at his former vice-president Mike Pence for certifying the election results”: Josh Marcus of The Independent (UK) has this report.

Posted at 8:34 AM by Howard Bashman



“As the Supreme Court wraps up, Justice Stephen Breyer offers no hints on retirement; Democratic activists are loudly lobbying for the oldest justice to step down”: Devin Dwyer of ABC News has this report.

Posted at 8:33 AM by Howard Bashman