How Obamacare supporters are plotting to win over Anthony Kennedy

Gov’t power being used to force secularization

Dissenters suggest High Court may rule for same-sex marriage

In our opinion: California’s ban of Scout-affiliated judges flies in the face of religious freedoms

De-judging the boy scouts

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?

Space enough for all: Nova Scotia Supreme Court makes decision on Trinity Western University Law School

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

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

Update: Religious freedom and a Canadian law school

Judge’s tough decision lectures about church rights and protections from ‘power of the state’ in huge win for Christian law school battling for survival

Sexual-behavior rules can’t disqualify Canadian law school from accreditation

Canadian court upholds religious freedom of law students

Media urge Supreme Court to allow broadcast coverage of marriage cases

Trinity Western law students OK to practise in Nova Scotia

Nova Scotia Supreme Court rules in favour of Christian university in B.C.

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

Tough times for Christian lawyers up north

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

A couple of items defending the constitutionality of conjugal marriage laws

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Federal appeals court slapped over lengthy ‘unpublished’ ruling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

Has SCOTUS stacked the deck against same-sex marriage in how it has framed the question?

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:

  • 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:

  • 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:

  • Tags: ,

Lawyers: interested in amicus help for your First Amendment cases (and related statutory cases)?

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

Pro-life, pro-choice groups agree in pregnancy case

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:

  • Tags: ,