Friday round-up – SCOTUSblog

Andrew Hamm Supervisor

Posted Fri, January 26th, 2018 10:14 am

Posted Fri, January 26th, 2018 10:14 am by Andrew Hamm

Redistricting worries keep on to occur just before the Supreme Court. Yesterday Pennsylvania questioned the Supreme Court to stage in and block temporarily a ruling by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania putting down the state’s federal congressional map. With commentary at the Lock Legislation Website, Ryan Lockman argues that “there is a minimum probability that [the state] will persuade Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy and the 3 remaining conservatives to encroach on condition sovereignty in this sort of a vogue, especially when the primary authority on which their argument is primarily based is Bush v. Gore.” Also yesterday, Chief Justice John Roberts questioned challengers to North Carolina’s condition legislative maps to respond by February 2 to the ask for by North Carolina Republicans to stay a final decision by a 3-choose federal courtroom invalidating those maps. A brief overview of the situation will come from Steven Mazie for The Economist’s Espresso website.


  • The editorial board of the Orlando Sentinel expresses its help for Fane Lozman, whose 1st Amendment retaliatory-arrest claim is the subject of oral argument in Lozman v. Metropolis of Riviera Beach front up coming month.
  • In the most current episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, Elizabeth Slattery and Tiffany Bates converse with Adam Feldman, the founder of Empirical SCOTUS, and engage in “Judge or Just Produced Up” – “can you location the bogus judges?”
  • For Nationwide Review’s Bench Memos, Ed Whelan implies that Monday’s unanimous final decision in District of Columbia v. Wesby, in which the courtroom held that law enforcement officers sued for wrong arrest immediately after arresting partygoers in an deserted property experienced probable bring about for the arrests and ended up entitled to immunity from the lawsuit, displays negatively on Decide Nina Pillard, who wrote the panel viewpoint for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
  • Counting to 5 (podcast) posts new four new episodes on the court’s views in Nationwide Association of Manufacturers v. Office of Defense, District of Columbia v. Wesby and Artis v. District of Columbia, and on the court’s current grants. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the respondents in NAM v. DOD.]

Posted in Round-up

Recommended Quotation:
Andrew Hamm,
Friday round-up,
SCOTUSblog (Jan. 26, 2018, 10:14 AM),


Shares 0

Post Author: gupta

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: