“Supreme Court Appears Skeptical of Biden’s Student Loan Forgiveness Plan; The administration faced a conservative court that has insisted that government initiatives with major political and economic consequences be clearly authorized by Congress”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
Robert Barnes, Danielle Douglas-Gabriel, and Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post report that “On student loan forgiveness, conservative justices skeptical of Biden plan; Roberts and others said Congress should be involved in such an expensive endeavor, and they questioned the plan’s fairness.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court casts more doubt on Biden’s plan to forgive student loans.”
Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Signals Skepticism on Biden’s Effort to Forgive Student Debt; Chief justice questions program’s fairness to those without college loans.”
John Fritze, Joey Garrison, Chris Quintana, and Alia Wong of USA Today have an article headlined “‘Massive new program’: Supreme Court majority signals skepticism over Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan.”
Alex Swoyer and Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times report that “Supreme Court signals skepticism of Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan.”
In commentary, online at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern has a jurisprudence essay titled “The Supreme Court’s Conservatives Tried Very Hard Today to Find a Good Reason to Screw Biden; But they couldn’t find any good reason.”
And online at Vox, Ian Millhiser has an essay titled “You probably won’t get any student loan relief, thanks to a GOP-controlled Supreme Court; At the end of the day, the most important question in US law is which political party controls the Supreme Court.”
“Equal Rights Amendment Backers Defeated in D.C. Court Appeal”: Chris Marr of Bloomberg Law has this report on a ruling that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.
“Supreme Court to Take Up Case on Fate of Consumer Watchdog; A decision against the bureau could cast doubt on every rule and enforcement action the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has taken”: Adam Liptak has this article in today’s edition of The New York Times.
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post reports that “Supreme Court takes up challenge that threatens consumer watchdog agency.”
Jess Bravin and Andrew Ackerman of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Consumer Bureau’s Funding; Lower court struck down independent funding system designed for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.”
And Alex Swoyer and Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times report that “Supreme Court to hear challenge to Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.”
“Man whose ‘Cops Ahead’ warning sign got him arrested can sue police; Connecticut attempted to prosecute Michael Friend for police interference but dropped the charges, saying his warning sign actually aided cops in their efforts to curb distracted driving”: Nina Pullano of Courthouse News Service has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued yesterday.
“Conservatives Have a New Rallying Cry: Down With ESG; A Federalist Society veteran is heading up a multimillion-dollar effort to push anti-ESG messaging and legislation.” Julie Bykowicz and Angel Au-Yeung of The Wall Street Journal have this report.
“New York’s Gun Laws Sow Confusion as Nation Rethinks Regulation; A Supreme Court decision overturning century-old New York gun regulations has produced scores of new lawsuits as jurists and citizens sort out what’s legal”: Jonah E. Bromwich has this front page article in today’s edition of The New York Times.
“‘Disturbed by Some Language’: Judge Concerned by Rise in Combative Opinions; ‘I’m a little disturbed by some language I see from time to time in the present day that is a bit more combative than what I’ve seen in the past . . . It’s something we judges need to keep in mind,’ said Judge D. Brooks Smith.” Avalon Zoppo of The National Law Journal has this report.
Smith made the remarks during a recent Supreme Court Historical Society talk titled “Civics and American Democracy: Judicial Independence: A Look Back, A Look Forward” (YouTube video link).
“The Texas judge who could take down the abortion pill; A devout Christian, Matthew Kacsmaryk has been shaped by his deep antiabortion beliefs”: Caroline Kitchener and Ann E. Marimow of The Washington Post have this report.
Programming note: I will be traveling for most of the day on Monday. As a result, new posts will not appear here until Monday night, although this blog’s Twitter feed will likely feature occasional updates.
At 9:30 a.m. eastern time on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to issue an Order List, which you can access thereafter via this link. At “SCOTUSblog,” John Elwood recently had this preview of some of the cases under consideration.
“Judicial Notice (02.25.23): Never Mind; SCOTUS has second thoughts about Section 230, a law firm sues one of its own for ‘quiet quitting,’ and other legal news from the week that was.” David Lat has this post at his “Original Jurisdiction” Substack site.
“How a Supreme Court justice’s paragraph put the Voting Rights Act in more danger”: Hansi Lo Wang of NPR has this report.
“Texas asks a Trump judge to declare most of the federal government unconstitutional; Ordinarily, this lawsuit would be laughed out of court; But you never can tell with Trump’s judges”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.
“The King, Student-Loan Forgiveness, and the Supreme Court; The Justices hear an historic case on the limits of presidential power”: This editorial appears in today’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.
“Consovoy Boutique Firm Back to High Court for Student Loans”: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson of Bloomberg Law has a report that begins, “J. Michael Connolly, who has spent his career behind the scenes in US Supreme Court cases, will make his argument debut in a high-stakes challenge to President Joe Biden’s $400 billion student loan debt relief program.”
“Appeals court pulls back on N. Carolina ‘ag-gag’ law ruling”: Gary D. Robertson of The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued yesterday.
“How can we measure the influence of President Biden’s court of appeals judges?” Derek T. Muller recently had this post at his “Excess of Democracy” blog.
“Mike Pence’s Dangerous Gambit”: Former Fourth Circuit Judge J. Michael Luttig has this guest essay online at The New York Times.
“Judge Harry Pregerson doc inspires at San Diego film festival; A documentary about former Ninth Circuit Judge Harry Pregerson offers a peek into his life, philosophy and legacy inside and outside the courtroom”: Sam Ribakoff of Courthouse News Service has this report.
You can view the trailer for the film “9th Circuit Cowboy — The Long, Good Fight of Judge Harry Pregerson” via this link.
“Biden nominates lawmaker’s son-in-law to bench again, but to lower court”: Nate Raymond of Reuters has a report that begins, “A Kansas prosecutor nominated last year to a seat on a federal appeals court has been renominated by President Joe Biden on Wednesday — but this time to a position as a lower-court judge in his home state.”
“Republicans request Biden’s court-packing commission turn over documents”: Alex Swoyer of The Washington Times has an article that begins, “House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has asked the leaders of President Biden’s panel probing an expansion of the Supreme Court to turn over their communications with each other and the White House. Mr. Jordan’s request on Friday was joined by the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.”
Politico has posted the letters here and here.
“SCOTUS stocks docket with blockbuster regulatory battles”: Pamela King of Greenwire has this report.
“Supreme Court’s pro-gun ruling could mean 150 more firearms deaths a year, Rand Corp. says”: In today’s edition of The Washington Times, Stephen Dinan has a front page article that begins, “The Rand Corp. has put a death toll on last year’s gun rights Supreme Court ruling, calculating that more permissive concealed-carry permit laws would lead to at least 150 additional firearms deaths each year.”
“Supreme Court Justice’s leave could have impact on pivotal environmental law case”: Sean Fine of The Toronto Globe and Mail has an article that begins, “Supreme Court Justice Russell Brown has taken a leave of absence that was not announced by the court, which has lost a strong voice for provincial rights as a major federalism case looms. The court confirmed in an e-mail to The Globe and Mail that the 57-year-old is on leave, which began Feb. 1. The court stressed that it is a confidential matter.”
“Kansas rights bill angers left with its definition of ‘woman’; Conservative states aim to clarify rules for single-sex areas”: Valerie Richardson of The Washington Times has an article that begins, “Legislators in red states are determined this year to do what Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson could not: provide a definition of the word ‘woman.'”
“Outcomes in Wisconsin Supreme Court race, challenge to abortion law seen as inextricably linked”: Alexander Shur of The Wisconsin State Journal has this report.
“The Supreme Court’s Conservatives Will Always Put Corporate Power First; The Section 230 cases force the justices to choose between right-wing culture wars and capital preservation; It’s not a close call”: Jay Willis has this post at Balls and Strikes.
“Republican Attorneys General Are Telling the Supreme Court What It Wants to Hear; The justices will soon decide whether the Biden administration is allowed to govern, or whether only Republican presidents get to do that”: Yvette Borja has this post at Balls and Strikes.
“U.S. Supreme Court’s ‘major questions’ test may doom Biden student debt plan”: John Kruzel of Reuters has this report.
“DeSantis wants to roll back press freedoms — with an eye toward overturning Supreme Court ruling; Florida Republicans are seeking to weaken laws protecting journalists”: Matt Dixon of Politico has this report.
“Trump 2020 Lawyer John Eastman Fights California Ethics Case; State bar regulators want Eastman to lose license to practice; Eastman contends the ethics case is politically motivated”: Zoe Tillman of Bloomberg News has this report.
And in related news, Tillman reports that “Trump 2020 Fraud Backer Sidney Powell’s Texas Ethics Case Tossed; Judge finds state bar regulators failed to support claims; Powell unsuccessfully challenged election results in states.”
“This obscure Senate tradition may decide whether Biden beats Trump’s record on judges; Democrats have opened the door slightly to curtailing the ‘blue slip’ courtesy, warning Republicans not to abuse it to block district judges who oversee their home states”: Sahil Kapur of NBC News has this report.
“Rep. Scott Perry fights to keep phone from team probing Jan. 6 attack”: Rachel Weiner of The Washington Post has this report.
Zoe Tillman of Bloomberg News reports that “Trump Ally Scott Perry Argues to Keep DOJ Out of His Phone; DC Circuit panel heard arguments in partially sealed case; Pennsylvania lawmaker claiming constitutional protection.”
Tierney Sneed and Katelyn Polantz of CNN report that “Appeals court questions access that prosecutors can have to a GOP lawmaker’s phone seized in 2020 election investigation.”
And Josh Gerstein of Politico reports that “Appeals court weighs Rep. Perry’s immunity from Jan. 6 probe; Two of the three D.C. Circuit judges hearing the case appeared highly skeptical of the Justice Department’s narrow view of the Constitution’s ‘speech or debate’ protection for lawmakers.”
The D.C. Circuit has posted online at this link the audio of the public portion of today’s oral argument.
“Bringing Family Law Expertise To SCOTX | Justice Debra Lehrmann”: You can access today’s new episode of the “Texas Appellate Law Podcast” via this link.
“All Georgia Democrats’ Angry Arguments Against A Clarence Thomas Statue Fall Apart”: Mark Paoletta has this post at The Federalist.
“Interview: Jeffrey Sutton.” Hugo Rosen has this post at the “High School SCOTUS” blog.
