Justice Alito’s son quits Gibson Dunn for capitol hill job

Initiative urges voluntary term limits for future justices

Texas judge disciplined for religious-cultural bias

Citizens, unite! Part two of your Constitution primer

Everything you need to know about Constitutional law

States seek high court review of abortion restrictions

Jury sides with Anapol Schwartz in gay lawyer’s suit

High court shakes up state bars

Scalia visits Jersey, slams Washington

Justices scarce on the commencement scene this year

D.C. Bar votes for next president-elect

Christie nominates 4 new judges, 8 for tenure

Richard Bartlett, who helped unify NY courts, dies at 89

Kansas Court of Appeals planning to swear in new judge

Judicial-Identity Disorder

    National Review: “Judicial-identity disorder,” or “judicial dysphoria,” is my proposed label to describe judges who experience significant discontent with the role they were assigned when they took office. JID typically manifests itself in judicial decisions that are inconsistent with the judicial role and in behavior that reflects a severe and pervasive discomfort with neutrally applying the law. Unfortunately, no effective treatment for the condition is currently available.

  • Posted: 05/05/2015
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.nationalreview.com

  • Tags:

Supreme Court rules judges can review EEOC

Listen to the oral arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges (the same-sex marriage case at the Supreme Court)

The dangers of a constitutional ‘right to dignity’

Taming the butterflies before a Supreme Court argument

End the Supreme Court’s ban on cameras

Burdened with debt, law school graduates struggle with job market

Harboring Doubts: On Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in ‘Employment Division v. Smith’

Southern District Judge Robert Patterson dies at age 91

Bill would create ethics code for Supreme Court justices

Senate confirms Loretta Lynch as Attorney General after long delay

Loretta Lynch confirmed as Attorney General

Why law schools are losing relevance — and how they’re trying to win it back

Marriage group calls on Ginsburg to recuse

A reporter’s guide to covering the same-sex marriage cases at the Supreme Court

Judge cuts legal fees in Alaska same-sex marriage case

Sotomayor: Don’t blame the Justices for politicization of Supreme Court

Michigan firm stays out of same-sex marriage case that partner will argue

Law prof’s blog post was not defamatory, court rules

Supreme Court asked to look abroad for guidance on same-sex marriage

Why the Supreme Court saves the ‘best’ decisions for last

Lawyers resist plan to trim length of appeals brief

Despite forecasts of doom, signs of life in the legal industry

A tip from the justices on writing: Keep it simple

A 12,500-word limit is too brief for some appellate lawyers

Study: Law faculties short on white Christians, republicans

Justices struggle with free speech case over license plates

Why Supreme Court protesters are treated differently

Seven-lawyer line-up for same-sex marriage hearings?

Federal court precedent: A defense of Judge Roy Moore and the Alabama Supreme Court

Major changes could be in store for law firm websites

Applying Holt v. Hobbs to a complex case – The demands of a transgender Native American inmate

Same-sex marriage briefs swamp Supreme Court

Suit challenges quote from British jurist posted in Rhode Island’s High Court

Over 300 Republicans petition Supreme Court to legalize same-sex marriage

Why the Supreme Court should scrap ObamaCare’s federal exchange subsidies

April arguments: Same-sex marriage cases set for April 28

Court to release same-day audio for same-sex marriage cases

Four ways the Supreme Court could rule on Obamacare

Argument analysis: Setting up the private debate on the ACA

The damaging effects of Obamacare

Seven things you should know about the IRS rule challenged in ‘King v. Burwell’

    CATO Institute: This week, the Supreme Court considers King v. Burwell. At issue is whether the IRS exceeded its authority under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by issuing a final IRS rule that expanded the application of the Act’s subsidies and mandates beyond the limits imposed by the statute. King v. Burwell is not a constitutional challenge. It challenges an IRS rule as being inconsistent with the Act it purports to implement. The case is a straightforward question of statutory interpretation.

  • Posted: 03/04/2015
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.cato.org

  • Tags: ,

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

Preview of Supreme Court oral arguments in Abercrombie employment discrimination case

Argument preview: Faith and a workplace dress code

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

ADF attorneys secure renewed protections for believers abroad

Justice Clarence Thomas asks a question – at Yale

Ginsburg doubts Roe v. Wade will be overturned