Richard Epstein: The classical liberal case against the contraceptive mandate is stronger than the religious one

Supreme Court Rule 28.8 may be invalid

Mormon church to weigh in on Utah marriage protection amendment

Hobby Lobby asks Supreme Court for exemption to Obamacare mandate

Religious liberty should trump HHS mandate | USA Today

Supreme Court decision in prayer case expected soon

Kathleen Parker: Obama’s blind spot on religious liberty

Hobby Lobby attorneys ask for prayer in buildup to Obamacare Supreme Court hearing | Charisma News

Assessing the Chief Justice’s self-assignment of majority opinions

    Amanda Frost at SCOTUSblog: “One of the Supreme Court’s (many) unwritten rules is that the Chief Justice selects the author of any opinion in which he is in the majority. In a recent article in Judicature, Linda Greenhouse analyzes the use of this prerogative by Chief Justice John Roberts and finds that, like many Chief Justices before him, he assigns himself the opinion more often in high-salience cases, and in particular those in which the Court is closely divided.”


  • Posted: 02/07/2014
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.scotusblog.com

  • Tags: ,

Liberty Counsel petitions Supreme Court on life change counseling ban

Harvard Law professor: “Legal lions Boies and Olson set back gay marriage”

    Noah Feldman at Bloomberg: “What there isn’t is room for Olson and Boies, two accomplished, intelligent and perfectly charming people who have lumbered into an extremely sensitive and complex area of legal activism in which they are, frankly, newcomers. Their Proposition 8 efforts substantiate this problem. Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the Ninth Circuit wrote an opinion in the Prop 8 case that was designed to avoid Supreme Court review — because he himself, a former colleague of Kennedy’s and the maestro of pushing the constitutional envelope, judged that the Supreme Court was not quite ready. When the case went before the Supreme Court anyway, Olson and Boies pushed the claim for universal gay rights instead of emphasizing Reinhardt’s narrow holding. They had to — because they were in it for the historic judgment, not to win a one-off case for their clients.”


  • Posted: 02/07/2014
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.bloomberg.com

  • Tags: , , , , ,

Senator says attorney in Utah marriage case has conflict of interest

Utah files first arguments in marriage appeal

9th Circuit puts hold on California’s life change counseling ban

“10th Circuit rejects request from 3 gay couples”

Justice Sotomayor describes navigating new worlds

Justice Alito: Court can’t worry about popularity

Court to review religious law once hailed by Democrats but now used to battle Obamacare

A Conversation with Justice Scalia | UNC School of Government Blog

Court to allow Utah lengthier brief in same-sex “marriage” appeal

Obamacare and religious liberty: Mandating carcinogens as “women’s preventive health”

ACLU suit against Utah’s marriage amendment moves to federal court

Supreme Court briefs favor Hobby Lobby 3-1 over Obama administration

“Bold challenge to a law on religion”: Analysis of FFRF’s amicus brief in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby

Ilya Shapiro: Defending religious liberty against Obamacare

9th Circuit grants 30-day rehearing extension in “sexual orientation in jury selection” case

“Gay-rights movement in uncharted territory” with Judge Reinhardt’s “heightened scrutiny” decision

Supreme Court gives Little Sisters temporary protection from contraception mandate | LifeSiteNews

Eugene Volokh: Could foreign law jeopardize American constitutional rights?

Attorney accused of defending Utah marriage amendment to impose religious viewpoint

Why Roe said what it did

Lyle Denniston: Did Windsor already settle the fate of state marriage protection amendments?

Supreme Court denies stay of execution in Texas for Mexican

Supreme Court struggles to determine child pornography restitution

ACLU sues Utah for not recognizing same-sex “marriages”

Supreme Court hears case on child pornography restitution

Supreme Court ruling due on child pornography victim restitution

Decision on Mass. case could end protest buffers in Pittsburgh | TribLive

Supreme Court abortion case weighs free speech, clinic safety | National Journal

Utah law professor to make case for child-porn victims

Utah AG picks outside counsel in same-sex “marriage” fight

“Women have a right to choose and protesters have a right to protest”

McCullen v. Coakley buffer zone commentary roundup

Supreme Court to decide if pro-life people have free speech at abortion clinics | LifeNews

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Case

“Utah marriage of same sex couples valid in Delaware, AG Biden says”

U.S. Supreme Court takes up abortion protest case | CNews

Supreme Court case sets precedent for Burlington’s buffer zone ordinance | Burlington Free Press

US Supreme Court to hear arguments Wednesday in ‘Cradle of Liberty’ buffer zone case

Supreme Court declines to hear Montana gun case

High court won’t hear Ariz. abortion ban challenge | CBN

Argument preview: “Buffer zones” and free speech

Supreme Court: Arizona can’t enforce ban on abortions after 20 weeks | LifeNews

Nebraska AG says he will defend fetal-pain law despite court ruling

AG Holder’s lawless action on marriage in Utah | Ed Whelan

Arizona’s abortion ban won’t be revived by Supreme Court

NYT: Where free speech collides with abortion rights

George Will: A defining moment for the court

“Federal recognition of Utah same-sex marriages shows need for State Marriage Defense Act”

Oral Arguments in McCullen v. Coakley on Wednesday, January 15

Federal government to recognize same-sex marriages in Utah

Judge Rebuilds ‘Berlin Wall’ Just for Home-Schoolers | Charisma News

Originalism: We the People of the Past, the Present, and the Future

Presidential power case before court hinges on history

12 attorneys general to SCOTUS: 10th Amendment ‘turned on its head’

    WorldNetDaily: “By abandoning any meaningful standard for the substantiality of an intrastate activity’s effects on interstate commerce, this court has enabled the Congress to ‘draw the circle broadly enough to cover’ activity, that when viewed in isolation, would have no substantial effect on interstate commerce at all,” representatives for the 12 states have told the high court.


  • Posted: 01/09/2014
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.wnd.com

  • Tags: , ,

Supreme Spin Cycle: Two cases test whether lower-court judges can ignore precedents.

“3 Big Questions About The 1,360 Same-Sex Couples Married In Utah”

Confusing Advice from Utah Governor on Marriage Laws | Ed Whelan at NRO