Homeland Security suspends immigration agreements with Arizona police

MN lawyers organize to support the marriage amendment

NY State Bar Association Urges Legislature to Support Establishment of Youth Courts

ABA Picks Sides on Judicial Nominations

Chief Justice Offers Hint at New Timing for Health Care Ruling

Fed Circuit Judges Attend Historic Intellectual Conference in China

Jordan Lorence: “Supreme Court Bingo: Which Justices Are Writing the Remaining Decisions?”

ABA Urges Senate to Vote on Appellate Judicial Nominees

“The Undemocratic Scramble Toward Same-Sex Marriage”

Boehner Accuses White House Of Cover-up

Paul Benjamin Linton: The Newest Front in the Battle over Marriage – Illinois

Jordan Lorence: “Supreme Court Bingo: Which Supreme Court Justices Are Writing the Remaining Opinions?”

    Jordan Lorence at the ADF Blog: The Supreme Court justices follow an informal protocol when assigning opinions to write to balance out the workload among all nine justices. This means that near the end of the term, it is sometimes possible to predict which justices is writing a particular decision. For example, if the justices heard 12 cases in a certain month, and all but one justice has authored opinions heard in that month, and there is only one decision from that sitting waiting to come down, we can predict with some certainty that the justice is the author of the unannounced decision. At ADF, we call this “Supreme Court Bingo.”


  • Posted: 06/20/2012
  • |
  • Category: ADF in the News
  • |
  • Source: blog.telladf.org

  • Tags: , , , ,

Preparing for Supreme Court opinion-release-aggeddon.

Judge reject’s Cooley’s ABA/NALP defense in fraud case

California: Gary Kreep clinches win for judge

Legal periodical: “How Much Should Judges Be Paid? An Empirical Study On The Effect Of Judicial Pay On The State Bench”

New Book: Failing Law Schools

Issa ‘disappointed,’ says Holder contempt vote will move forward

California State Bar argues for law licenses for illegals

WA state budget cuts divide 9th Circuit

Why Are Americans Losing Trust in the Supreme Court?

    The Nation: A plausible answer is: partisanship. Polls show a widespread disgust with partisanship in Washington; Congress’s approval rating was at an all time low in May. Although the justices often are divided into left-right ideological blocs, those blocs have recently become identified in the public mind with the Democratic and Republican parties. That, combined with a set of cases that bring partisan issues to the fore, may be leading the public to see the Court as part of the same Washington politics it deplores.


  • Posted: 06/19/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.thenation.com

  • Tags: , , ,

ABA releases very detailed and dismal law school employment information

Five Graduate Degrees That Don’t Pay Off

Robert Bacharach’s Tenth Circuit Nomination Held Up in Senate

Chief Justice Names 10 to California Judicial Council

ACS Panel on Nominations, Recess Appointments and the Filibuster

In second book, Scalia, Garner warn judicial decisions leading to ‘descent into social rancor’

    National Law Journal: “The descent into social rancor over judicial decisions is largely traceable to nontextual means of interpretation, which erode society’s confidence in a rule of law that evidently has no agreed-on meaning,” the authors state. “Our legal system must regain a mooring that it has lost: a generally agreed-on approach to the interpretation of legal texts.” The book, titled Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts . . .


  • Posted: 06/18/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.law.com

  • Tags: , ,

Supreme Court’s Super Mondays Don’t Serve Justice

Holder Refuses to Provide Testimony on Kagan’s Involvement in Obamacare

“Illinois State’s Attorney’s Gay Marriage Support Part of an ‘Inside Job’”

Grassley Chides Kyl in Dispute Over Pro-Abortion Judge; Rare Intraparty Rebuke

U.S. Supreme Court: Never mind the 9. Meet the 36.

Ballot measure would change how AZ judges are appointed

    VerdeNews: Arizona voters are being asked to give Gov. Jan Brewer and her successors more power to choose who they want to serve as judges. Proposition 115 would sharply alter the process voters approved in 1974, which has special screening panels review would-be judges for the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and the superior courts of Pima and Maricopa County.


  • Posted: 06/13/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: verdenews.com

  • Tags: , ,

Illinois Rep. Reis Objects to AG’s Support of Lawsuit to Redefine Marriage

Catholic law schools and the student debt crisis

Lawyer Survey Reveals Many Lawyers Plan to Hire in Third Quarter

Sen. Grassley demands re-vote on 9th Circuit judge nomination

1/3 of all cases before SCOTUS are from the 9th Circuit

Senate confirms another pro-abortion judge to the 9th Circuit

Big Law lobbies for openly “gay judge” in Richmond

Florida, Rick Scott Sue Feds Over Voter Purge

GOP Senators lash lower court’s “animus” based DOMA ruling in 9th Circuit filing

Dems block McCain resolution on special counsel for leaks

Richard A. Epstein: “Intellectual Laziness on the Supreme Court: It’s time to scrap the irrational rational basis test”

    Richard A. Epstein at The Hoover Institution Journal: The bottom line is this: The Supreme Court should never accept the open invitation to intellectual laziness and antisocial results that comes from adopting the rational basis test in any case that involves government regulation or taxation. There are all sorts of powerful and instructive private analogies that give clear guidance on how constitutional law cases should be decided, and these rules never give pride of place to some exaggerated concern with administrative costs.


  • Posted: 06/12/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.hoover.org

  • Tags: , ,

PA: Special interests trumped voters on choosing judges

Eric Holder warns of ‘constitutional crisis’

SG deputy chosen for judgeship

The Scales of Intimidation: Does the Supreme Court feel threatened, intimidated, or harassed by the press?

    Slate: As Richard Hasen pointed out last week, these claims that big donors are being “harassed” and “intimidated” by media scrutiny comes at precisely the same moment that a handful of conservative thinkers started accusing Obama (apparently by way of his thuggish henchman otherwise known as legal scholar and writer Jeffrey Rosen) of “harassing” and “intimidating” the Supreme Court itself.


  • Posted: 06/12/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.slate.com

  • Tags: , ,

D.C. Commission Announces 17 Applicants for Superior Court Vacancy

Sixth Circuit Smackdown Watch: Vying to Top Reversal Honors with the Ninth Circuit

Firm’s niche: Lobbying for federal judges

What price is N.J.’s judiciary system paying for Gov. Christie’s battle with Senate Dems?

Justices Decline Review of Religious Speech Case

Obama Nominates Two for U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DOJ says Issa playing ‘political games’ with contempt threat; Boehner says produce the information

Michael McConnell: Citizens United and the Wisconsin Vote

The Process of Drafting Supreme Court Opinions and Interesting Stats

Dissents undermine the highest court

    Joseph P. Nadeau at Boston Globe: When the court announces its much anticipated decision on national health care, expected in the next few weeks, there is the real prospect of another 5-4 decision, which means, once again, a case where dissenting justices are likely to write scathing separate opinions. Perhaps it would be more constructive for the court to decide cases by majority vote and issue a single opinion in the name of the court without publishing the votes or opinions of individual justices.


  • Posted: 06/11/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: bostonglobe.com

  • Tags: , ,

How Paul Clement Wishes He Could Prepare for Argument

Senate Defeats Filibuster Against Pro-Abortion Obama Judge

Senate Gears up for Fight Over Pro-Abortion Ninth Circuit Judicial Nominee

Florida AG won’t rule out suing feds over stonewalling noncitizen voter hunt

NC Supreme Court candidate speaks at local forum

A Record 1/3 of Law Grads’ Jobs Don’t Require Bar Passage

Law Prof: Economics of Legal Education Are Broken Because of Exacting Standards, Loan System

The 18-Year Bench: Linda Greenhouse calls for Supreme Court term limits.

    Linda Greenhouse at Slate: When I first heard academic chatter about doing away with life tenure for federal judges, I thought it was a bad, if not crazy, idea that threatened the Framers’ plan to guarantee judicial independence. But more recently, against my instincts, I have found myself drawn to the notion


  • Posted: 06/08/2012
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.slate.com

  • Tags: ,

Tony Mauro: Why top court is a key 2012 issue

LifeSiteNews: “Anatomy of a lie: Kansas court’s scheme to eliminate Planned Parenthood prosecutor revealed”

Supreme Court Justices: Addicted to Google

Fla. Gov. Scott requests review of 3 justices’ actions