Category Archives: Bench & Bar

Protect taxpayers from illegal taxes

The part of the Abercrombie & Fitch case that had the Supreme Court Justices laughing at their own jokes

Transcript available for SCOTUS arguments in Abercrombie & Fitch

Court dismisses religious and speech objections to requirement that witness stand to be sworn in

Justices struggle with a different sort of marriage right

Abercrombie’s fashion rules land at the Supreme Court

Supreme Court’s recent attention to religion isn’t impressive: Charting 65 years of cases

Tennessee Supreme Court upholds spiritual healing exemption interpreted narrowly

    Religion Clause: Viewed in context, it is apparent that the legislative intent was for the exemption to apply to members of religious bodies which, like the Church of Christian Science, are established institutions with doctrines or customs that authorize healers within the church to perform spiritual treatment via prayer in lieu of medical care. Because the exemption is effectively limited to members of religious groups that closely resemble the Christian Science Church, the terms at issue are not so vague that the scope of the exemption “cannot be ascertained.”


  • Posted: 02/18/2015
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: religionclause.blogspot.com

  • Tags: , , ,

The Sides of March: Carvin and Verrilli to square off on Obamacare

Justice Clarence Thomas asks a question – at Yale

Ginsburg doubts Roe v. Wade will be overturned

What’s the right remedy in King v. Burwell?

How Obamacare supporters are plotting to win over Anthony Kennedy

Ginsburg voices concerns about abortion rights, campaign finance

Kagan dishes on Supreme Court Bar, State of the Union, and law schools

The Supreme Court won’t be airing its same-sex marriage decision on live TV

Why judges tilt to the right

Why this court term matters

Can America’s faith-based law schools restrict sexual activity to heterosexual marriage?

Justice Kagan’s ‘very conflicted’ about cameras in High Court

California Supreme Court attempts to ban state judges from volunteering with Boy Scouts

Media urge Supreme Court to allow broadcast coverage of marriage cases

2015 is shaping up to be a significant year for religion at the Supreme Court

Attorney General nominee supported partial-birth abortions

New & forthcoming books on the Supreme Court

Church property fight turns on Constitutional issues

California judicial ethics code changed to bar judges from membership in Boy Scouts

Should they stay or go: Justices and the State of the Union

Transgender individual challenges constitutionality of ADA exclusion

God in the details: NLRB modifies test for jurisdiction over religious education employers

State high court’s vote affecting Scout affiliation stirs debate anew

Federal appeals court slapped over lengthy ‘unpublished’ ruling

Protesters disrupt beginning of U.S. Supreme Court session

Scalia lands at top of sarcasm index for Justices. Shocking.

In Philadelphia, Alito reminisces about influential appeals judge

Supreme Court Justices get stuck in traffic, too

More on: Investigate the Ninth Circuit’s case assignments

Supreme Court seems troubled by job bias cases

This week at the Supreme Court

Supreme Court justices or mind readers? You be the judge

Your right to take a tiger selfie

    Bloomberg View: Is New York state’s ban on “tiger selfies” the goofiest law of the year? It might be absurd for the state to pass a law banning the taking of photographs with jungle cats, but there’s nothing in the U.S. Constitution that bans absurd laws. The practical question — at least if you’re a New York stud who wants a tiger selfie for your Tinder photo — is whether the law is constitutional. If it is, you might have to travel to New Jersey (gasp) for your close encounter of the feline kind.


  • Posted: 01/12/2015
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.bloombergview.com

  • Tags: , ,

Reinhardt anomalies–3,350-to-1 odds

    National Review: I’ve presented evidence that arch-liberal Ninth Circuit judge Stephen Reinhardt has benefited from unusual case assignments by the Ninth Circuit clerk’s office. I’m now pleased to highlight a massive statistical analysis of Ninth Circuit case assignments that uncovers statistically significant anomalies that uniquely favorReinhardt. According to the study’s author, the odds that random chance would have generated Reinhardt’s pattern of case assignments are “about 3350 to 1”—yes, that’s three thousand, three hundred fifty to one—against.


  • Posted: 01/12/2015
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.nationalreview.com

  • Tags: , ,

High court won’t hear challenge to Vermont campaign law

Retiring Chief Justice Castille says he kept faith in fellow jurists

Court issues orders but does not grant any new cases

Conn. Supreme Court rules 17-year-old cancer patient must have chemo

Ohio Supreme Court chief justice to support pro bono work

Groups ask Supreme Court to hear Wisconsin voter ID case

Re: Investigate the Ninth Circuit’s case assignments

Draw back the curtain? No cameras may penetrate the Supreme Court for quite a while

Connecticut Supreme Court to hear case of teen forced to undergo chemo

Huge constitutional cases await Supreme Court in 2015

Petitions to watch; Conference of January 9

Gov. Herbert nominates 3rd District Judge Deno Himonas to Utah Supreme Court

O Little Town of Litigation: A holiday lawsuit roundup

‘The Relist Watch before Christmas’

God’s Defense Attorney

Is legal education a zombie?

Senate may confirm up to 88 federal judges in ’14

A curious panel selection procedure

    Ethics and Public Policy Center: Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has long seemed to enjoy remarkable good fortune in getting assigned to sit on ideologically charged cases. Suspicions that his good fortune hasn’t been entirely due to luck were bolstered recently when the 9th Circuit revealed that its clerk’s office had had a longstanding but undisclosed practice of assigning expedited cases — which tend to be of special importance — to the calendar panel with the most senior presiding judge.


  • Posted: 12/16/2014
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: eppc.org

  • Tags: ,

What the Justices say about the High Court bar

Chewing over the “power bar”: Biskupic discusses major study of the Supreme Court bar’s influence on certiorari

How elite lawyers influence the Supreme Court

California bar passage lowest in nearly a decade

Congress again considers cameras in the courtroom – including at the Supreme Court

    SCOTUS Blog: At a hearing yesterday of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Courts, IP and the Internet, there was strong bipartisan backing for the introduction of cameras at the Supreme Court and other federal courts. But even if the bill being discussed – H.R. 917, the Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2013 – makes it out of committee and becomes a law, don’t count on watching Supreme Court proceedings from the comfort of your own home anytime soon: although the bill authorizes the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to allow the Court’s proceedings to be televised, it does not mandate cameras at the Court.


  • Posted: 12/04/2014
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.scotusblog.com

  • Tags: ,

Law schools still have a ways to fall

Is Fisher v. University of Texas a precedent on jurisdiction?

Justices weigh bias claim of pregnant UPS driver

A look at ‘Justice Scalia’ on the small screen

Argument preview: Pregnancy and workplace equality

    SCOTUS Blog: For nearly four decades, it has been a form of illegal discrimination in the workplace to treat women workers unequally, just because they become pregnant. But it still is not entirely clear just how much and what kind of equality that provision imposes on businesses. They clearly cannot treat pregnancy as a reason to fire a worker, or cut her pay, or to deny her health benefits. That is outright discrimination based on sex, under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, added in 1978 to Title VII of federal civil rights law.


  • Posted: 12/02/2014
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.scotusblog.com

  • Tags: ,