Skip to main content

LIIBULLETIN: US Supreme Court arguments next week

supreme-ct.jpegApril 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.

Pew reports internet evolution

According to the Pew Research Center, the number of people using the internet is steadily increasing. Indeed, more adults are online than ever before. Pew’s latest survey (April 2006) shows that about 147 million adults — fully 73% of respondents — are internet users, up from 66% (about 133 million adults) in their January 2005 survey. And, 42% of Americans now have broadband connections at home (about 84 million people), up from 29% (about 59 million) in January 2005.

Our favorite quotes: Warren Burger

Concepts of justice must have hands and feet or they remain sterile abstractions. The hands and feet we need are efficient means and methods to carry out justice in every case in the shortest possible time and the lowest possible cost. That is the challenge to every lawyer and judge in America. Warren E. Burger (1907-1995) US Supreme Court Justice, Address to the American Bar Association, 12 Feb 1978

Who’s in the stacks?

The Pew Internet and American Life Project recently reported some interesting findings from its survey about how people use the internet, libraries, and government agencies when they need help. Here’s one: For help with a variety of common problems, more people turn to the internet than consult experts or family members to provide information and resources. Another finding is, perhaps, more of a surprise — members of Gen Y (age 18-29) are the leading users of libraries for help in solving problems and in more general patronage.

The study (done in partnership with the the University of Illinois -Urbana-Champaign) also found that the vast majority of Americans want and expect information about government programs to be available on the internet. We’re doing our part: LII is a partner in Cornell’s e-Rulemaking Initiative, a multidisciplinary collaboration to consult with government agencies on the technology and practice of e-rulemaking and related areas of e-government.

Standing: definition of the day

Because Federal courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought simply on the ground that an individual or group is displeased with a government action or law. Only those with enough direct stake in an action or law have “standing” to challenge it. A decision that a party does not have sufficient stake to sue will commonly be put in terms of the party’s lacking “standing”. For Supreme Court decisions focusing on the “standing” issue, see, e.g., County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991), Northeastern Fla. Chapter of the Associated Gen. Contractors v. City of Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656 (1993) and Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992).