This week, as many Court Watchers debated what three of The Nine did (or did not) say about masking (or not masking) on the bench, we remained focused as ever on the Court’s decisions. While the Court’s lone signed opinion—an 8-1 ruling on the Confrontation Clause—was hardly a match for the masking drama, it also issued two orders that were plenty newsworthy.
First, in
Read More Trump v. Thomas (No.21A272), In re Whole Women’s Health (No. 21-962), Hemphill v. New York (No. 20-637)On Thursday, the Court issued two hotly anticipated decisions involving the Biden Administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor (No. 21A244), a 6-3 Court stayed the OSHA’s mandate that would have required 84 million workers to be vaccinated or obtain weekly negative tests. But in Biden v. Louisiana, No. 21A241, a 5-4 Court upheld a mandate
Read More National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor (No. 21A244), Biden v. Louisiana (No.21A241), Babcock v. Kijakazi (No. 20-480)On Friday, the Court issued its second signed opinion of the term, and it was the decision we all thought was going to be OT21’s first: Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson, No. 21-463. As we previewed last time, the case involves two challenges to a recently enacted Texas law, S.B.8, which generally prohibits physicians from performing abortions if the physician detects a fetal heartbeat.
Read More Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson (No,21-463), United States v. Texas (No. 21-588), Mississippi v. Tennessee (No. 143, Orig.)Happy Thanksgiving! Yes, we know that’s not usually the most proximate holiday when we hit your inboxes for the first time in a term, and, yes, there have been some interesting cert grants and orders on the “shadow docket” that we probably should have been dishing about over the last month or so, but in the spirit of the holidays, let’s let bygones be bygone.
Read More Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson (No,21-463), United States v. Texas (No. 21-588), Mississippi v. Tennessee (No. 143, Orig.)We trust you enjoyed a festive Fourth, but we all know summer can’t truly begin until the Supreme Court term comes to an end. The Nine closed up shop on Friday after their “clean-up conference,” granting cert in 10 new cases, including Carson v. Makin (No. 20-1088), a sort of sequel to Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), which asks whether it violates
Read More TransUnion v. Ramirez (No. 20-297), PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey (No. 19-1039)Let’s get right to it…
At issue in Brnovich v. DNC were two restrictions in Arizona’s otherwise fairly permissive voting laws. First, some counties do not count in-person ballots cast on election day if they are cast in the wrong precinct. Second, mail-in ballots can be collected only by an election official or mail carrier, a member of the voter’s household or family, or a
Read More Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (No. 19-1257), Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (No. 19-251), Johnson v. Guzman Chavez (No. 19-987)