Supreme Court Civil Rights Law News - U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court - The FindLaw U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Summaries Blog

Recently in Civil Rights Law Category

The same-sex marriage cases, known to posterity as DeBoer v. Synder, may very well be the biggest civil rights decision of our generation. As such, everyone wants to put their two cents into what will undoubtedly become an historic opinion.

Lots of people want in on the action. Lots. As of April 3, one hundred and thirty-seven individuals, organizations, and states have filed amicus briefs in support of one side, or neither side.

Here's a brief round-up of just some of these 137 briefs.

An ankle bracelet is more than a fashion statement: it's a search. At least according to the Supreme Court's holding in Grady v. North Carolina, which found that a state conducts a Fourth Amendment search when it affixes a device to an individual's body, sans consent, for the purposes of monitoring them.

The case involves Torrey Grady, a "recidivist sex offender" who was ordered to wear a tracking device at all times, much to his dislike. Grady's cert. petition asked the Court to decide whether the monitoring bracelet was an unconstitutional search, in violation of the offender's Fourth Amendment rights. The Court didn't go that far, however, content on ruling on the search issue alone.

An employment policy that accommodates disabled workers must also accommodate pregnant workers, the Supreme Court said on Wednesday in a 6-3 opinion in Young v. UPS. After becoming pregnant, UPS driver Peggy Young was advised by her doctor not to lift more than 20 pounds; however, UPS requires drivers to be able to lift up to 70 pounds.

Young requested temporary reassignment or an accommodation, but UPS refused, even though it granted such requests to employees for on-the-job injuries or for statutory reasons, like an ADA-protected disability. She sued, claiming disparate treatment under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.

In 2012, the Alabama legislature redrew the state's legislative districts. In doing so, it attempted to keep the districts roughly equal in population and, in order to remain compliant with the Voting Rights Act, keep about the same black population percentage in existing majority-minority districts.

These goals were sometimes at odds with each other, and in the end, Alabama added more black voters to existing majority-minority districts in order to prevent the percentage of minority voters in those districts from declining. The Alabama Black Legislative Caucus and Alabama Democratic Conference called this an impermissible "racial gerrymander."

Speech is free -- unless it's government speech, in which case, it's a little less free. The question before the Supreme Court in Walker v. Sons of Confederate Veterans involved ostensibly private speech with elements of government speech.

The Texas division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans petitioned to have the state create a license plate with the Confederate flag on it. The state refused, and now we're at the Supreme Court, with a bunch of justices who aren't sure whether a license plate is government speech or a public forum.

Same-sex nuptials have taken place in parts of Alabama, after the U.S. Supreme Court voted 7-2 not to stay enforcement of a federal judge's order that the state's gay marriage ban was unconstitutional. The High Court's decision paved the way for same-sex marriages to begin immediately (though some county courts still declined to issue marriage licenses, AL.com reports).

Wait -- I did say "7-2," didn't I? Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Antonin Scalia, wrote a three-page dissent that Court watchers are saying tips the Court's hand vis-a-vis same sex marriage.

Why do these things always happen on a Friday? Last week, the Supreme Court dropped the bombshell that it was reviewing the Sixth Circuit's same-sex marriage case.

Today, the Court announced that it would hear the appeal of Richard Glossip and two other death row inmates in Oklahoma scheduled to be executed in the next few months. The petition is noteworthy because the inmates are challenging the legality of the lethal injection process itself.

In a case that Court-watchers were eagerly anticipating, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously today in Holt v. Hobbs that a prison policy prohibiting inmates from growing beards unless they have a dermatological condition violates the First Amendment.

Holt, a prisoner in Arkansas, converted to Islam and changed his name to Abdul Maalik Muhammad. Muhammad's reading of Muslim scripture required him to grow a beard, something prison policy forbade. Muhammad sued pursuant to the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).

SCOTUS Grants Cert. to Gay Marriage Cases: 2 Questions Presented

Following the Sixth Circuit's decision in November upholding gay marriage bans in Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee, many felt it was a matter of "when" not "if" the Supreme Court would decide to tackle the issue of gay marriage again.

It turns out, the "when" is apparently now. The Court announced this morning it was granting cert. in four cases challenging the constitutionality of the bans in those four states. The decision in the case will likely have historic impact on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage across the country.

As the kids say: It's on.

3 New Grants: Texas License Plates, La. Execution, Patents

Happy Friday y'all! Today's breaking news out of the Supreme Court involves grants in three cases -- two from Texas and one from Louisiana. The first case, and the more important one in my opinion, is the First Amendment license plate case that we've covered previously -- the state of Texas is denying requests for Confederate flag vanity plates.

Also from Texas, the Court will take on patent issues once again in a spat over Cisco's Wi-Fi products.

Finally, in a death penalty case out of Louisiana, the Court will have the opportunity to flesh out their holding from Atkins v. Virginia. More specifically, do courts have to hold a separate hearing regarding mental disability and competency to be executed? And do they have to cover the tab for evaluations?