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)Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (No. 19-1257), Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (No. 19-251), Johnson v. Guzman Chavez (No. 19-987)
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)Brnovich v. Arizona (No. 19-1257), Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (No. 19-251), Minerva Surgical v. Hologic (No. 20-440), Johnson v. Guzman Chavez (No. 19-897), PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey (No. 19-1309), Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation (No. 20-543), HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining v. Renewable Fuels Assn (No. 20-472)
In the final day of OT20, the Court handed down its two biggest decisions of the term: In Brnovich v. Arizona (No. 19-1257), the Court held (in a 6-3 decision by Justice Alito, with Justice Kagan leading the dissent), that two of Arizona’s recently enacted voting restrictions do not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and that one in particular (an anti-ballot…
Read More Brnovich v. Arizona (No. 19-1257), Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (No. 19-251), Minerva Surgical v. Hologic (No. 20-440), Johnson v. Guzman Chavez (No. 19-897), PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey (No. 19-1309), Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation (No. 20-543), HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining v. Renewable Fuels Assn (No. 20-472)Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation (No. 20-543), Transunion LLC v. Ramirez (No. 20-297), Hollyfrontier Cheyenne Refining v. Renewable Fuels Ass’n (No. 20-472), Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (No. 20-255), Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (No. 20-107), Collins v. Yellen (No. 19-422), Lange v. California (No. 20-18)
Maybe The Nine are aware that President Biden’s SCOTUS-reform commission is meeting next week, or maybe they’re just not the political animals they’ve been made out to be, but the Js finished out the (presumably) penultimate week of OT20 with a trio of decisions revealing notable cross-aisle collaborations:
- In Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation (No. 20-543), the Court—in an 6-3
Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (No. 20-255), Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (No. 20-107), Collins v. Yellen (No. 19-422), Lange v. California (No. 20-18), NCAA v. Alston (No. 20-512), United States v. Arthrex (No. 19-1434), Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (No. 20-222)
Four new opinions today, including the case of the cussing cheerleader, Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (No. 20-255), where the Court held (8-1) that, while schools may sometimes have a special interest in regulating some types of off-campus speech, those interests were insufficient to justify disciplining B.L, who posted vulgar Snapchat messages after being cut from the varsity cheerleading squad. This morning’s other…
Read More Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (No. 20-255), Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (No. 20-107), Collins v. Yellen (No. 19-422), Lange v. California (No. 20-18), NCAA v. Alston (No. 20-512), United States v. Arthrex (No. 19-1434), Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (No. 20-222)NCAA v. Alston (No. 20-512), United States v. Arthrex (No. 19-1434), Goldman Sachs Group v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (No. 20-222), California v. Texas (No. 19-840), Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (No. 19-123), Nestle USA, Inc. v. Doe (No. 19-416)
Yesterday, in the first of three announcements scheduled for this week, the Court handed down three decisions: In NCAA v. Alston (No. 20-512), the Court unanimously affirmed a lower-court decision enjoining the NCAA from restricting member colleges from providing education-related benefits (like free laptops and paid internships) to athletes. In United States v. Arthrex (No. 19-1434), the Court held (5-4) that Congress violated…
Read More NCAA v. Alston (No. 20-512), United States v. Arthrex (No. 19-1434), Goldman Sachs Group v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (No. 20-222), California v. Texas (No. 19-840), Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (No. 19-123), Nestle USA, Inc. v. Doe (No. 19-416)