Supreme Court People and Events News - U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court - The FindLaw U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Summaries Blog

Recently in People and Events Category

We've got a double-dose of Supreme Court-related news today: A Supreme Court justice officiated a same-sex marriage over the weekend. And though Justice Elena Kagan isn't the first current or retired justice to do so, it's sure to draw some complaints and questions about bias, with the Court set to hear same-sex marriage cases at some point this term.

Speaking of same-sex marriage, in one week, the Supreme Court will consider the handful of petitions floating in the cert. pool at its first conference of the term. The New York Times reports that lawyers in the cases are jockeying for position in their briefs, hoping that their case becomes the case.

Seven more days folks: Seven days until we get to cert. petitions, oral arguments, and Court decisions.

Today be Talk Like a Pirate Day, and rather than keel-haul the lot of ye, ye may be well served reading these piracy-related cases from the U.S. Supreme Court. That's right: Actual cases of real pirates on the High Seas, doubloons, eye patches, yard-arms. (OK, maybe not really any of those.)

Actually, the Supreme Court has had little occasion to deal with cases involving piracy; and when it has, the cases have involved terribly unsexy topics like statutory construction and vagueness.

Here are three of the Court's earliest piracy cases to satiate your desire for swashbuckling -- which these cases won't, it turns out:

Speaking at the University of Minnesota Law School earlier this week, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that the Sixth Circuit cases on same-sex marriage were going to be crucial to the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decisions.

If the Sixth Circuit upholds bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, "there will be some urgency" on the High Court's part to intervene, Ginsburg told the audience.

The topic of the week for me seems to be legal writing. And my favorite type of post is the "poll the audience" post because it means I can be a spineless scribe and take no stance whatsoever.

So, after writing an advice column for law students and young attorneys about legal writing, I decided to shelve my "Sexiest SCOTUS Justice" topic for a few more weeks and instead ask you, dear readers, who you think the best and worst writers among our Supreme Court justices?

A note: I'm including a few suggestions from myself, the press, blogs, and Twitter friends, but I'll include all nine justices in each poll, just in case.

Marcia Coyle, a long-time Supreme Court reporter and the author of a great book on the Roberts Court, sat down earlier this week with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her chambers.

This interview went a bit deeper than a lot of recent interviews, and covered a broad range of topics, with Ginsburg's statements on these five topics standing out to me the most: the death penalty, Justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissents, gay marriage, law school, and the "Notorious RBG" fan club.

The U.S. Supreme Court has stayed the Fourth Circuit's decision in the Virginia gay marriage case, which means licenses won't be handed out to same-sex couples tomorrow. Anyone surprised by this? Thought so.

And despite a national trend toward increased support for same-sex marriage, at least one state is still staunchly opposed. Any guesses?

And finally, who wants to see a Supreme Court justice dump a bucket of ice water on his or her noggin? (Answer: We all do!)

With only two years left in his presidency, and no apparent Supreme Court vacancies in sight, is President Obama ever going to nominate another justice?

Following the president's remarks on that very topic this week, The Wall Street Journal's Jacob Gershman did the math, and it looks like Obama may indeed get that chance, at least statistically speaking. According to Gershman, 82 percent of U.S. presidential terms have overlapped with at least one vacancy on the Supreme Court.

That's a pretty high number, but how could he have arrived at that figure? Let's take a closer look.

With the High Court still on summer vacation, there are no hard-hitting legal issues before the Court quite yet (unless you count Justice Sonia Sotomayor rounding up kids to hug Hillary Clinton as "hard-hitting").

As a result, we have three important current events from the world of the Supreme Court this week to tide you over until October -- or at least, until our next blog post:

Some would argue that the Supreme Court is utterly predictable: We all know that Scalia is going to go scour the statutes, Thomas is going to complain about Commerce Clauses (dormant or otherwise), and Sotomayor is going to tick off her colleagues.

And with 9-0 decisions at a high point (66 percent this term, versus an average of 44 percent over the preceding five terms), prediction can't be that difficult, can it?

According to Prof. Josh Blackman, the creator of FantasySCOTUS, the "power predictors" hit 75 percent. Next season, FantasySCOTUS players will go up against more than a few SCOTUS nerds with lucky guesses: They'll battle a predictive algorithm designed by Blackman and his colleagues, one that predicts individual justices' votes 70.9 percent of the time, and overall affirm/reverse decisions 69.7 percent, tested against 7,000 past cases.

Many liberals want Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire immediately, despite her status as a liberal lion and the leader of the "left" side of the bench. Conservatives want her to stick around, again, despite her political leanings and even though she's shown no signs of slowing down whatsoever.

Why? Everybody is worried about Ginsburg's potential replacement. If she retires while President Barack Obama is in office, and before this year's midterms, there's a good chance she'll be replaced with a like-minded judge, leaving the 4-4-Kennedy split. Republicans, obviously, would prefer that she hold out, hoping that 2016 brings a conservative to White House (and one to her seat as well).

We've said it before, and so has Justice Ginsburg: As long as she's able, she's not planning to step aside for anyone. But an interesting article in The Daily Beast argues that it's already too late -- a filibuster would block a liberal replacement anyway.