Been a bit, but better belated than benever. (Seriously, Henry Benever was a uniquely undistinguished Member of Parliament.) As we tread water nervously in anticipation of a deluge of decisions next week (and each remaining week of the term), it’s high tide time we worked our way through the current logjam. (We’re obviously counting on alliteration and bad puns to make up for the delay
Encino Motorcars v. Navarro (16-1362), Kisela v. Hughes (17-467), Hall v. Hall (16-1150)
Even though the Court is in the midst of a historically slow term (as measured by opinion output), we’ve managed to fall behind. We’ll take advantage of this off-week to get you caught up to speed with summaries of three outstanding (as in, overdue, if not necessarily superlative) decisions.
First up, in Encino Motorcars v. Navarro (No. 16-1362), the Court finally resolved
Read More Encino Motorcars v. Navarro (16-1362), Kisela v. Hughes (17-467), Hall v. Hall (16-1150)Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund (15-1439), Marinello v. United States (16-1144)
When the Court indicated yesterday (as opposed to Friday, like usual) that there would be a “possibility of opinions” today (as opposed to Monday, like usual), there was some speculation that something interesting could be afoot. Perhaps, one theory went, The Nine wanted to rush out a decision in Gill v. Whitford (the partisan gerrymandering case argued in October) before it hears argument in Benisek
Read More Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund (15-1439), Marinello v. United States (16-1144)
Orders: March 21, 2018
- In Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund (No. 15-1439), a unanimous Court held that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA)—a statute that amended the Securities Act of 1933—did not deprive state courts of
Merit Management Group v. FTI Consulting (16-784), U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge (15-1509), Texas v. New Mexico (141, Orig.)
We’re back with the last of our catch-up series on the decisions announced during the Court’s February sitting. Lucky for us, if you’re reading this in the Northeast, it won’t take much for you to suspend disbelief and imagine yourself reading our summaries of Merit Management Group v. FTI Consulting, U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, and Texas v. New Mexico back
Read More Merit Management Group v. FTI Consulting (16-784), U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge (15-1509), Texas v. New Mexico (141, Orig.)
Jennings v. Rodriguez (15-1204), Patchak v. Zinke (16-498), Class v. United States (16-424)
We’re back with Part II of our February-sitting catch-up, with summaries of Jennings v. Rodriguez, Patchak v. Zinke, and Class v. United States. Without further ado…
The high-profile immigration detention case Jennings v. Rodriguez (No. 15-1204) was originally argued in November 2016, when the Court had only eight members. Presumably to avoid a 4-4 split on a significant issue—whether detained immigrants have
Read More Jennings v. Rodriguez (15-1204), Patchak v. Zinke (16-498), Class v. United States (16-424)