One of the big narratives of OT2018 has been growing divisiveness between the Justices over the death penalty, attributable in no small part to the departure of Justice Kennedy, who regularly served as the swing vote in such cases (often, though not always, siding with the Court’s more liberal wing). While the Court’s April 1st decision in Bucklew v. Pettigrew (2019) certainly falls in
Read More Dunn v. Price (No. 18A1053)
Bucklew v. Pettigrew (No 17-8151), Biestek v. Berryhill (No. 17-1184), Lorenzo v. SEC (No. 17-1077), Sturgeon v. Frost (No. 17-949)
We’re back with the second installment of our April catch-up series, bringing you summaries of Bucklew v. Pettigrew (No. 17-8151), Biestek v. Berryhill (No. 17-1184), Lorenzo v. Securities Exchange Commission (No. 17-1077), and Sturgeon v. Frost (No. 17-949).
In a term thus far characterized by unanimous and lopsided decisions, the controversial 5-4 splits are starting to trickle out. In our last
Read More Bucklew v. Pettigrew (No 17-8151), Biestek v. Berryhill (No. 17-1184), Lorenzo v. SEC (No. 17-1077), Sturgeon v. Frost (No. 17-949)Nielsen v. Preap (No. 16-1363), Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP (No. 17-1307), Republic of Sudan v. Harrison (No. 16-1094), Murphy v. Collier (No. 16-1094)
The Nine have managed to outpace us over the last two weeks, but now that they’re on April Break, it’s time for us to catch up. In this installment, we’ll cover Nielsen v. Preap (No. 16-1363), on discretionary bond for certain “criminal aliens”; Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LP (No. 17-1307), on who or what counts as a “debt collector” under the Fair Debt
Read More Nielsen v. Preap (No. 16-1363), Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP (No. 17-1307), Republic of Sudan v. Harrison (No. 16-1094), Murphy v. Collier (No. 16-1094)Frank v. Gaos (No. 17-961), Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries (No. 17-1101), Washington State Department of Licensing v. Cougar Den, Inc. (No. 16-1498)
The Court was back in action this week, with perhaps its most active week of the term so far. On Tuesday, the Court issued three decisions, adding two more on Wednesday and a number of cert grants for next term, to boot. Besides the uptick in volume, the decisions are also becoming a bit more contentious: This week saw several concurrences, dissents, and only our
Read More Frank v. Gaos (No. 17-961), Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries (No. 17-1101), Washington State Department of Licensing v. Cougar Den, Inc. (No. 16-1498)BNSF Railway v. Loos (No. 17-1042), Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com, LLC (No. 17-571), Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc. (No. 17-1765)
OT18 has been marked by its unanimity, with 13 out or 18 decisions so far coming down without dissent. This week, we can add two more to that tally, but we’ll begin with the split decision.
On its surface, BNSF Railway v. Loos (No. 17-1042) raised an answered an extremely narrow and uncontroversial question: Whether a railroad’s payment to an employee of damages for lost
Read More BNSF Railway v. Loos (No. 17-1042), Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com, LLC (No. 17-571), Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc. (No. 17-1765)Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert (No. 17-1094), Garza v. Idaho (No. 17-1026), Madison v. Alabama (No. 17-7505), Jam v. International Finance Corp. (No. 17-1011), Yovino v. Rizo (No. 18-272)
We’ve got a lot to cover this week, with five new opinions on subjects ranging from capital punishment to foreign sovereign immunity to aphrodisiacs.
Okay, aphrodisiacs may not strictly have been the subject of Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert (No. 17-1094), but they did provide the factual background for the Court to decide a question of interest both to procedure nerds and the class action
Read More Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert (No. 17-1094), Garza v. Idaho (No. 17-1026), Madison v. Alabama (No. 17-7505), Jam v. International Finance Corp. (No. 17-1011), Yovino v. Rizo (No. 18-272)