Supreme Court arguments this week

The Supreme Court hears another 6 cases this week.  The quick rundown follows, with the usual link to our complete analysis of each case.

Monday, March 2

• Atlantic Sounding Co., Inc. v. Townsend, Edgar L. (maritime law, Jones Act, punitive damages, workers compensation)
• District Attorney’s Office, et. al. v. Osborne, William G. (post-conviction, due process, Sec. 1983, DNA testing, freestanding claim of innocence, discovery, substantive claim, materiality, habeas petition, exculpatory evidence) 

Tuesday, March 3

• Arthur Andersen LLP, et. al. v. Carlisle, Wayne, et. al. (Federal Arbitration Act, stay of trial, non-party, non-signatory, arbitration clause, agreement to arbitrate, appeal, appellate jurisdiction)
• Caperton, Hugh M., et. al. v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., et. al. (Fourteenth Amendment, recusal, appearance of bias, judicial elections)

Wednesday, March 4

• Abuelhaswa, Salman K. v. United States (drug felony, misdemeanor, facilitate, cellular phone)
• Dean, Christopher M. v. United States (criminal law, mens rea, sentence enhancement, mandatory minimum, firearm)

Don’t forget — you can get your very own free subscription to the LII Supreme Court Bulletin will get you a summary of all Supreme Court cases delivered directly to your inbox 2 weeks before the scheduled argument.

6 Supreme Court oral arguments this week

The Supreme Court hears 6 cases this week.  A quick rundown follows, with a link to our complete analysis of each case.

By the way, your very own (free!) subscription to the LII Supreme Court Bulletin will get you a summary of all Supreme Court cases delivered directly to your inbox 2 weeks before the scheduled argument.

Monday, February 23:

• United States v. Navajo Nation (Indian Affairs, Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938, Indian Tucker Act, fiduciary duty)
• Rivera v. Illinois (jury, due process, peremptory challenge, voir dire, Sixth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment)

Tuesday, February 24:

• Burlington No. & Santa Fe R. Co. v. United States; Shell Oil Co. v. United States (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, superfund, hazardous substance, joint and several liability, Environmental Protection Act)
• Carlsbad Technology, Inc. V. HIF Bio, Inc. (supplemental jurisdiction, remand to State court, discretion, subject matter jurisdiction)

Wednesday, February 25:

• Flores-Figueroa v. United States (aggravated identity theft, deportation, immigration, illegal alien)
• Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs (Hawaii, apology resolution, fiduciary telationship, land ownership, Native Hawaiians)

LII Supreme Court Bulletin: November previews

Today the Supreme Court begins its November argument session. As it did in October, the high court will hear arguments in fourteen cases. Once again, the LII Supreme Court Bulletin has prepared oral argument previews for all of the month’s cases. A few topics on the Court’s agenda: obscenity on the airwaves, criteria a government may use to select which donated monuments to display, immunity for prosecutorial misconduct, and asylum for refugees who have been compelled to collaborate with their persecutors. (To receive these previews two weeks in advance, please subscribe to the LIIBULLETIN email service.)

Supreme Court’s new term

Today the Supreme Court begins its new term. Its first month will be busy this year: the Court will be hearing arguments in fourteen cases (more than half again as many as it heard last October). Fortunately, the intrepid LII Supreme Court Bulletin crew has prepared oral argument previews for all of the October cases. Read all about the cases — and don’t forget to subscribe to the LIIBULLETIN email, which will bring you the previews approximately two weeks before the cases are argued. We hope you’ll join us.

LIIBULLETIN: US Supreme Court arguments this week

April 22 Davis v. Federal Election Commission: Over the years, Congress and the judiciary have made significant changes to the campaign finance system in an attempt to make it more evenhanded and to root out corruption. The case at hand is another test of Congress’s latest attempt to create sustainable election financing laws through the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment”.

Giles v. California: Defendants have a right to confront witnesses by subjecting them to cross-examination under the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause, but may waive this right by making a witness unavailable through wrongdoing. The Court’s decision in this case will determine the scope of a defendant’s right to cross-examine witnesses and how broadly courts may apply the forfeiture doctrine.

April 23 Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory: Since 1963, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) has provided both a means to ferret out insidious age discrimination and an effective defense for the business community to justify its actions through the “reasonable factors other than age”defense. In this case, the Court will determine whether the burden of proving the “reasonableness” of the challenged practice falls upon the employer or the employee — a decision worth almost $6 million dollars in this case.

Metlife V. Glenn: The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) provides a private cause of action for employees challenging wrongful denials of benefits under an employee benefits plan. In this case, the Court will determine whether and to what extent a plan administrator that both authorizes the payment of benefits and is responsible for the payment of those benefits has a conflict of interest that must be considered on judicial review.

LIIBULLETIN: US Supreme Court arguments next week

April 14th: Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle will test the degree to which tribal courts have jurisdiction over non-tribal parties.
Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co. v. Bridge: The Court’s decision in this case will determine whether reliance on a fraudulent mailing is necessary in a civil claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) and, if so, whether it must be by the plaintiff.

April 15th: In Irizarry v. United States the Supreme Court will decide whether a district court is required to provide a defendant with notice of its intent to depart from the sentence range established by the US Sentencing Guidelines under certain circumstances.
Greenlaw v. United States: The decision in this case will reflect the Justices’ view of the appropriate balance between the interest of the courts in consistently interpreting and applying sentencing statutes, and defendants’ right to appeal without subjecting themselves to a sentence increase.

April 16th: In Kennedy v. Louisiana the Supreme Court will clarify the Eighth Amendment constitutionality of capital child rape statutes.
Taylor v. Sturgell: The decision in this case will clarify the circumstances under which courts’ denial of one person’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) claim prevents a second person from asserting a very similar claim in a later lawsuit.