Posted Tue, February 13th, 2018 7:16 am by Edith Roberts
Court-watchers go on to remark on one of the major conditions of the February sitting down — Janus v. American Federation of Point out, County, and Municipal Staff members, Council 31, in which the court docket will consider whether an Illinois regulation permitting public-sector unions to demand nonmembers for collective-bargaining routines violates the 1st Amendment. At the Daily Beast, Barrett Holmes Pitner maintains that “attacks on public-personnel unions represent an extension of the numerous attacks upon minorities engulfing America.” The editorial board of The Washington Write-up endorses a “middle way … that could maintain precedent while addressing employees’ reputable worries about involuntarily funding political leads to.”
- At Justia’s Verdict blog, Sherry Colb weighs in on McCoy v. Louisiana, in which the court docket will choose irrespective of whether the regulation enables a protection attorney in a capital circumstance to concede a defendant’s guilt to the jury about the defendant’s specific objections, arguing that “finding for the defendant in this circumstance would not chance a slide down a slippery slope,” mainly because “[m]ost of a protection attorney’s strategic decisions do not slide in the array of possibilities that a defendant has the suitable to immediate.”
- At The Environment and All the things In It (podcast), Mary Reichard discusses the oral arguments in McCoy and Dalmazzi v. United States, which includes the influence of the dual-officeholder ban on armed service judges.
- Subscript offers a graphic explainer for Currier v. Virginia, which asks what takes place to a defendant’s double jeopardy protections when he consents to sequential trials for various, overlapping offenses.
- In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Moments, Matthew Finkin appears to be at Epic Devices v. Lewis, in which the court docket will choose irrespective of whether labor guidelines forbid class waivers in employment contracts, contending that “[t]he NLRA plainly grants employees the suitable to be a part of together in ‘concerted routines,’ which includes in collective or class authorized action from their companies [, a]nd these compelled arbitration waivers plainly contradict the two the letter and the intent of the NLRA.”
- At The Atlantic, Garrett Epps asserts that the Pennsylvania Republicans calling for Supreme Court intervention into a condition court docket ruling, primarily based on the condition constitution, that invalidated the state’s congressional maps as a political gerrymander, are mounting a “partisan assault on the courts [at] the idea of a nationwide spear—Republican initiatives to purge and rework condition courts to make absolutely sure they adhere to the party’s line.”
- At The Intercept, Liliana Segura appears to be at the tale driving Bobby Bostic’s cert petition, which raises an Eighth Amendment problem to the 241-calendar year sentence Bostic gained in 1997 for a sequence of armed robberies he fully commited when he was 16 years outdated, arguing that there is a “distinction with out a difference” between Bostic’s sentence and the sentence of lifestyle with out parole for a nonhomicide criminal offense fully commited by a juvenile that the court docket discovered unconstitutional in Graham v. Florida.
We rely on our audience to ship us backlinks for our spherical-up. If you have or know of a latest (printed in the last two or three days) short article, write-up, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the spherical-up, be sure to ship it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!
SCOTUSblog (Feb. 13, 2018, 7:16 AM),