Posts filtered by tags: Rucho[x]


 

Wednesday round-up

At Slate, Mark Joseph Stern maintains that in recent decisions striking down partisan gerrymanders in several states, federal “courts have called SCOTUS’s bluff[:] They’ve shown the justices exactly why partisan gerrymandering infringes on the Constitution, and how it can be remedied.” At the Election Law Blog, Nicholas Stephanopolous argues that “[n]ow that courts have invalidated congressional districts in Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, there are very few remaining...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Court, Fbi, Pennsylvania, Wall Street Journal, Round-up, Mark Joseph Stern, Jess Bravin, Kavanaugh, Common Cause, Brett Kavanaugh, Tonja Jacobi, Rucho, Benisek, Nicholas Stephanopolous


Friday round-up

Briefly: At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie casts doubt on suggestions by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh during oral argument in Rucho v. Common Cause, a partisan gerrymandering challenge to North Carolina’s congressional districts, that “the democratic process may spare the Supreme Court from stepping in.” At SCOTUS OA, Tonja Jacobi and Matthew Sag offer an initial big-picture analysis of all the oral arguments in the current term. At Law360 (subscription req...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, America, United States, North Carolina, Economist, Round-up, Steven Mazie, Gundy, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, Jimmy Hoover, Tonja Jacobi, Rucho, Matthew Sag


Monday round-up

Briefly: Adam Liptak visits The New York Times’ podcast The Daily to talk about Department of Commerce v. New York, a challenge to the Trump administration’s decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census that is “the biggest case in front of the Supreme Court this session.” At CNN, Joan Biskupic reports that “[r]ecent late-night orders, an abrupt dismissal of a case after oral arguments, and long-pending appeals that have fallen into a black hole at the Supreme Court have cast...
Tags: New York, Supreme Court, Law, America, Cnn, United States, New York Times, Michigan, Trump, Round-up, Adam Liptak, Kenneth Jost, Jost, Department of Commerce, Joan Biskupic, Varela


Tuesday round-up

The justices will hear oral argument this morning in two cases. The first is Parker Drilling Management Services. Ltd. v. Newton, in which they will consider whether California’s overtime and wage laws apply to drilling rigs on the Outer Continental Shelf. Andrew Siegel previewed the case for this blog. Lauren Devendorf and Tyler Schmitt have a preview at Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. This morning’s second argument is in North Carolina Dept of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestn...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, California, Washington Post, Court, Npr, Los Angeles Times, Cornell, Newton, Ucla, Round-up, Lyle Denniston, Robert Barnes, Howe, Jess Bravin, Nina Totenberg


Friday round-up

For the Los Angeles Times, David Savage reports that “Wedding cakes and same-sex marriages are back before the Supreme Court, and this time the justices are being asked to rule broadly that the 1st Amendment’s protection of the ‘free exercise’ of religion shields conservative Christians from state civil rights laws.” At Rewire.News, Jessica Mason Pieklo writes that the petitioners in Klein v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, which stems from two bakery owners’ refusal on religious grounds ...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Washington, United States, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Border Patrol, Trump, Round-up, U S Supreme Court, John Roberts, Roberts, Robertson, Swartz, Rodriguez, Elena Kagan, Nogales


Wednesday round-up

Briefly: At The Daily Caller, Kevin Daley reports that “the April 1 decision in Bucklew v. Precythe suggests the newly entrenched conservative majority may well be the most execution-friendly bench in decades.” At National Review, Carrie Severino pushes back against a recent suggestion that new Justice Brett Kavanaugh is proving less conservative then expected, remarking that “[a] full term on the Court is a short period to make generalizations about judicial performance” and asking how “any hi...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Court, Round-up, Bucklew, Common Cause, Carrie Severino, Brett Kavanaugh, Kevin Daley, Rucho, Benisek, Lamone, Precythe, Mike Stephens, Junaid Odubeko


Thursday round-up

At , Tony Mauro reports that “[t]he book-writing bug has bitten U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, as it has with several of his colleagues”: A “book by Gorsuch titled ‘A Republic, If You Can Keep It,’ will be published in September” and “will include eight original essays as well as a collection of Gorsuch speeches and writings.” Additional coverage comes from Patrick Gregory and others at Bloomberg Law. At Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy blog, John Stinneford writes of Monday’s decision in...
Tags: Mississippi, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Court, Atlantic, United States, Missouri, Flowers, Round-up, Thomas, U S Supreme Court, Montgomery County, Adam Feldman, John Stinneford, Garrett Epps


Tuesday round-up

The justices decided two cases yesterday. In Bucklew v. Precythe, the court, by a vote of 5-4, rejected a death-row inmate’s argument that, because he suffers from a rare medical condition, executing him by lethal injection would be so painful that it would violate the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Amy Howe has this blog’s opinion analysis, which first appeared at Howe on the Court. For The New York Times, Adam Liptak reports that the decision “revealed fault lines and cons...
Tags: New York, Supreme Court, Law, Court, Indiana, New York Times, Nielsen, Los Angeles Times, Trump, Round-up, Thomas, Howe, Adam Liptak, Jess Bravin, Sullivan, Clarence Thomas


Monday round-up

For , Jess Bravin reports that last week’s order temporarily halting the execution of a Buddhist prisoner, Patrick Murphy, pending review of Murphy’s challenge to Texas’ refusal to allow a Buddhist priest to join him in the execution chamber “contrasted sharply with the court’s 5-4 vote last month rejecting a similar plea from a Muslim inmate in Alabama.” At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie calls the order “something of a surprise” “[g]iven the justices’ recent decision” ...
Tags: New York, Texas, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Washington Post, Alabama, America, Bloomberg, New York Times, Ada, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Chevron, Economist, Trump, Round-up


Friday round-up

Last night the Supreme Court halted the execution of a Buddhist prisoner, Patrick Murphy, pending review of Murphy’s challenge to Texas’ refusal to allow a Buddhist priest to join him in the execution chamber. Amy Howe has this blog’s coverage. At Bloomberg, Greg Stohr reports that “[[t]he order marked an abrupt shift for the court, which last month voted 5-4 to let Alabama execute a Muslim man without his imam.” Robert Barnes reports for The Washington Post that “[t]he court’s conservatives wer...
Tags: Texas, Mississippi, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Washington Post, Alabama, America, Bloomberg, Alaska, Louisiana, Flowers, Ada, Chevron, Economist, Trump


Thursday round-up

Amy Howe analyzes yesterday’s oral argument in Kisor v. Wilkie, in which the justices considered whether to overrule precedents that require courts to defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own regulations, for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court; she reports that the justices were “deeply divided in a case in which their ruling could have implications not only for veterans but also for other areas of the law ranging from the environment to immigra...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Bloomberg, Cnn, Alaska, New York Times, SEC, Louisiana, Smith, Frost, Sturgeon, Securities And Exchange Commission, National Park Service, Round-up, Reuters, John Roberts


Wednesday round-up

Today the justices wrap up their March argument sitting with one oral argument, in Kisor v. Wilkie, in which they will reconsider precedents that require courts to defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own regulations. Amy Howe previewed the case for this blog. Benjamin Rodd and Julia Hollreiser have a preview for Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute, and Subscript Law offers a graphic explainer for the case. Yesterday the court heard oral arguments in two pa...
Tags: Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Court, Los Angeles, Cnn, Atlantic, Gop, Alaska, Federal Communications Commission, Louisiana, North Carolina, Frost, Sturgeon, National Park Service, Round-up


Afternoon round-up: Today’s oral argument in partisan gerrymandering cases

Today the Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases, Lamone v. Benisek and Rucho v. Common Cause, which challenge the constitutionality of election maps in Maryland and North Carolina, respectively. The justices are being asked whether the states went too far in favoring one political party over the other when drawing their election maps. Amy Howe has this blog’s analysis, which was first published at Howe on the Court. She writes that after two hours of argument, “there were clear divides ...
Tags: Post, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Bloomberg, New York Times, Fox News, Associated Press, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Usa Today, North Carolina, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Round-up, Reuters, Mark Sherman


Argument transcripts

The transcript of today’s oral argument in Rucho v. Common Cause is available on the Supreme Court’s website; the transcript in Lamone v. Benisek is also available. The post Argument transcripts appeared first on SCOTUSblog.
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Common Cause, Merits Cases, Rucho, Benisek, Lamone


Argument analysis: Justices divided and hard to read on partisan gerrymandering

Today the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a pair of cases that could prove to be among the most consequential of the term. The cases involve allegations that state officials engaged in unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering – that is, they went too far in taking politics into account – when they drew election maps in North Carolina and Maryland. After over two hours of debate this morning, there were clear divides among some of the justices, but it was much less clear how the court is lik...
Tags: Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Court, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Republican, North Carolina, Paul Clement, Steven, John Roberts, Roberts, Howe, Sullivan


Justices Weaponize Redistricting Reform Against Partisan Gerrymandering Foes

Conservative justices on the Supreme Court and Republican lawyers love redistricting reform as an argument against the court reining in extreme partisan gerrymandering. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh on Tuesday both brought up the push in several states to create independent redistricting commissions and other measures to limit legislators from drawing extremely unfair maps. Paul Clement — a former U.S. solicitor general in the George W. Bush administration   representing North Car...
Tags: News, Maryland, Supreme Court, Congress, Colorado, Senate, Gop, House, Arizona, Redistricting, Dc, Republican, North Carolina, George W Bush, Paul Clement, Voting Rights


How The Partisan Gerrymandering Cases Before SCOTUS Are Different This Time

The Supreme Court has for decades avoided addressing partisan gerrymandering, concerned about about meddling too much in the inherently political process of drawing state legislative and congressional districts. Their next chance to weigh in on the issue begins Tuesday, when oral arguments kick off in a trio of interrelated cases arguing that extreme partisan gerrymandering fatally undermines democracy. In 2018, to the deep disappointment of voting rights activists, the court kicked cases from...
Tags: News, Maryland, Supreme Court, Court, Gop, Wisconsin, Gerrymandering, North Carolina, Kennedy, Black, Martin O'malley, Allegra Kirkland, Democratic Party, Roberts, Gil, David Lewis


Tuesday round-up

This morning the court will hear oral arguments in two partisan-gerrymandering cases. First up is Rucho v. Common Cause, a challenge to North Carolina’s federal congressional map, adopted by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature in 2016. Connor O’Neill previews the case for Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. This morning’s second argument is in Lamone v. Benisek, in which Republican voters are challenging a single Maryland congressional district. Matt Farnum and Trevor O’B...
Tags: Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Court, New York Times, Federal Communications Commission, Npr, Nielsen, North Carolina, Kevin Johnson, Cornell, Economist, Round-up, Lyle Denniston, Howe, Adam Liptak


Monday round-up

This morning the court begins the second week of the March sitting with two oral arguments. First up is PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic Inc., which asks whether the Hobbs Act, a jurisdictional-channeling statute, requires courts to accept the Federal Communications Commission’s interpretation of a statute allowing recipients of “junk faxes” to sue the senders for damages. Christopher Walker previewed the case for this blog. Luís Lozada and Isaac Syed have a preview at Cornell L...
Tags: Mississippi, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Washington Post, Bloomberg, Ford, Federal Communications Commission, Nielsen, North Carolina, Flowers, Patterson, Cornell, South, Walgreen, Round-up


This week at the court

The Supreme Court will release orders from the March 22 conference on Monday at 9:30 a.m.; John Elwood’s Relist Watch compiles the petitions that were relisted for this conference. There is a possibility of opinions on Tuesday and Wednesday. On Monday, the justices hear oral argument in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic Inc. and The Dutra Group v. Batterton. On Tuesday, the justices hear oral argument in Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek. On Wednesday, the justices hear...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Wilkie, Common Cause, This Week at the Court, John Elwood, Kisor, Rucho, Benisek, Lamone, Dutra Group, PDR Network LLC, Carlton Harris Chiropractic Inc, Batterton


Argument preview: Justices to tackle partisan gerrymandering … again

Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this post ran on February 4, 2019, as an introduction to this blog’s symposium on Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, as well as at Howe on the Court, where it was originally published. Every 10 years, the federal government conducts a census. The states then use the data from the census to draw new maps for their state legislatures and federal congressional districts. The maps often take politics into account – for example, to protect incumbents. Bu...
Tags: Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Court, Pennsylvania, United States, Wisconsin, Party, North Carolina, John Delaney, Charlotte, Raleigh, John Roberts, Roberts


Monday round-up

This morning the Supreme Court begins its March sitting with two oral arguments. The first case is Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, an appeal by Republican legislators of a lower-court ruling that requires 11 state legislative districts to be redrawn to correct racial gerrymandering. Amy Howe had this blog’s preview, which was first published at Howe on the Court. Amanda Wong and Jared Ham preview the case at Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute, and Subscript Law has a g...
Tags: New York, Mississippi, Supreme Court, Law, Washington Post, America, Bloomberg, House, New York Times, Npr, Louisiana, North Carolina, Flowers, Smith, The Washington Post, Cornell


Thursday round-up

Briefly: At The Daily Caller, Kevin Daley notes that “Chief Justice John Roberts has made common cause with the Supreme Court’s liberal bloc as late, breaking with his conservative colleagues on cases relating to abortion, the death penalty and President Donald Trump’s revised rules for asylum seekers,” and that “[i]n isolation, it’s difficult to know what to make of the chief’s votes.” In an op-ed for Fox News, Kristen Waggoner hopes that the recent settlement between Colorado and Christian ba...
Tags: Supreme Court, Law, Colorado, Indiana, Atlantic, Fox News, Christian, Illinois, Donald Trump, Madison, Round-up, John Roberts, International Finance Corporation, Jam, NLRA, Marbury


Symposium: 1 First Street, NE, Punxsutawney, PA

Tyler Green is the solicitor general of Utah. My last contribution to a SCOTUSblog symposium on political gerrymandering used homemade bad theater to depict how a Supreme Court decision setting a standard for political-gerrymandering claims would change life for state legislators and their attorneys. The court dodged this issue in Gill v. Whitford. But the issue has returned this term in Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek. These events evoke a seasonally appropriate, classic film — Grou...
Tags: Utah, Featured, Supreme Court, Law, Arizona, Davis, Bill Murray, States, Pittsburgh, Gore, Bush, Phil, Punxsutawney, Gill, Heimlich, Sandra Day O'Connor


Symposium: Precedent dictates a win for the plaintiffs in this term’s partisan-gerrymandering cases

Guy-Uriel E. Charles is the Bennett Boskey Visiting Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and Edward and Ellen Schwarzman Professor of Law at Duke Law School. Luis E. Fuentes-Rohwer is Professor of Law and Harry T. Ice Faculty Fellow at Indiana University Bloomington Maurer School of Law. In Lamone v. Benisek, a three-judge federal district court in Maryland concluded that Maryland Democrats intentionally moved 66,000 Republican voters out of Maryland’s Sixth Congressional District in order to ...
Tags: Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Green, Tennessee, North Carolina, Edward, Baker, White, Carr, Harvard Law School, Maryland Democrats, Sims, Reynolds


Symposium: Much ado about partisan gerrymandering

Kaylan L. Phillips serves as litigation counsel for the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a 501(c)(3) public interest law firm dedicated to election integrity. For more than 30 years, the Supreme Court has struggled to articulate a standard for evaluating partisan-gerrymandering claims. The reason is simple: There is no workable standard. Redistricting is a quintessential lawmaking function, one that the Constitution reserves to the states. Court intervention should be reserved for the most egre...
Tags: Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Shelby County, Gill, Common Cause, League of Women Voters, North Carolina Democratic Party, Whitford, Public Interest Legal Foundation, Rucho, Benisek


Symposium: How to win the partisan gerrymandering cases

Daniel Tokaji is Associate Dean for Faculty and Charles W. Ebersold and Florence Whitcomb Ebersold Professor of Constitutional Law at The Ohio State University Michael E. Moritz College of Law. No one said this would be easy. For decades, critics of partisan gerrymandering have been knocking on the U.S. Supreme Court’s door, seeking a ruling that extreme gerrymanders violate the U.S. Constitution. Even as the problem has worsened, the court has refused to open that door – though it hasn’t locked...
Tags: Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Williams, Wisconsin, Courts, Ohio, North Carolina, Kennedy, Anderson, Rhodes, Sonia Sotomayor, U S Supreme Court


Symposium: Why not continue the political struggle in partisan-gerrymandering cases?

Derek Muller is an associate professor of law at the Pepperdine University School of Law. “In a democratic society like ours, relief must come through an aroused popular conscience that sears the conscience of the people’s representatives.” So wrote Justice Felix Frankfurter in his dissenting opinion in Baker v. Carr in 1962. It was, of course, a dissent. A majority of the Supreme Court in short order reorganized state legislatures according to its own understanding of fair representation — that...
Tags: Utah, Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, California, Massachusetts, Indiana, Arizona, Davis, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Baker, Carr, Democratic


Justices to tackle partisan gerrymandering … again: In Plain English

Every 10 years, the federal government conducts a census. The states then use the data from the census to draw new maps for their state legislatures and federal congressional districts. The maps often take politics into account – for example, to protect incumbents. But in March, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument on whether state officials can go too far, so that they actually violate the Constitution, when they draw maps that favor one political party at another’s expense. And with the r...
Tags: Featured, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Congress, Pennsylvania, United States, Wisconsin, Party, North Carolina, John Delaney, Charlotte, Raleigh, John Roberts, Roberts, Fayetteville


Court releases March calendar

The Supreme Court issued the argument calendar for its March sitting today. Over a six-day period from March 18 through March 27, the justices will hear oral argument in nine cases. Three of those cases are likely to be among the biggest cases of the term. On March 26, in Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, the justices will return to the topic of partisan gerrymandering – that is, the idea that state officials violate the Constitution when they draw district lines to favor one politica...
Tags: Featured, Mississippi, Maryland, Supreme Court, Law, Kentucky, Virginia, United States, Federal Communications Commission, North Carolina, Flowers, Smith, U S Supreme Court, Howe, Mississippi Supreme Court, Wilkie