Not much to report from yesterday’s order list except that the Court asked the Solicitor General to weigh in on three cases. (As you know, this means that at least someone on the Court is interested in hearing these cases. By asking the SG to brief the issue, they get the views of the United States before they decide whether to take the case.) The SG will opine on the following:
1. Higbee Co. v. Chapman (02-1646): The petition in this case asks the Court to interpret 42 USC 1981(a). Specifically, the petition asks whether the language in that statute that protects an individual’s right to “full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings” applies to both state and private action.
2. Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. of Education (02-1672): This case arises under Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments, which bans gender discrimination in federally assisted education programs. In this case, the question is whether there is a private right of action under Title IX to redress retaliation for complaints about unlawful sex discrimination.
3. 3M Company v. LePage’s, Inc. (02-1865): An antitrust case with the following question presented: May dominant firm’s discounted but above-cost prices for volume purchases, of either individual products or multiple products, be condemned as unlawful under Section 2 of the Sherman Act based on incentive such low prices offer to shift purchases away from smaller rivals?