On June 25, in a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court issued the opinion, penned by Justice Alito, in the case Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam.
The court reversed and remanded the case to the courts below, holding that, As applied in this case, U. S. C. § 1252(e)(2)—which limits the habeas review obtainable by a noncitizen detained for expedited removal—does not violate the suspension or due process clauses.
Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Breyer filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Ginsburg Joined. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Kagan joined.
To discuss the case, we have O.H. Skinner, Arizona Solicitor General.
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Amicus Presents: The Class of RBG Part One
Dahlia Lithwick goes back to where one of the most influential legal careers in US history began—Harvard Law School, September 1956—to find out what we can learn from the other women of the class of 1959, and their notorious classmate.
Read Slate’s full interview with Ruth Bader Ginsburg about her own time at Harvard Law School and her memories of her female classmates here. Read the full stories of each woman’s life here.
Podcast production by Sara Burningham.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Opening Arguments - OA405: SCOTUS OKs Execution of Prisoner with Alzheimer’s
You'll never guess which 5 justices were in the affirmative in this case and which 4 dissented... unless you've ever listened to our show, in which case you'll easily guess. Andrew discusses this decision and why the popular idea that Roberts is turning more liberal is a misconception. We also talk about the latest in Trump v. Vance and when we might see Trump's tax returns or possibly an indictment!
Links: Trump v. Vance Status Report; Purkey Opinion; OA400: No, John Roberts Is Not Your Friend; Roberts Is The New Swing Justice. That Doesn’t Mean He’s Becoming More Liberal; July 2020 Bar Exam: Jurisdiction Information
SCOTUScast - United States Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association – Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court released its decision in the case of United States Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association. By a vote of 7-2, the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit was reversed, and the case remanded.
Per Justice Thomas's opinion for the Court: "We granted certiorari in these consolidated cases to decide whether the United States Forest Service has authority under the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U. S. C. §181 et seq., to grant rights-of-way through lands within national forests traversed by the Appalachian Trail. 588 U. S. ___ (2019). We hold that the Mineral Leasing Act does grant the Forest Service that authority and therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit."
Justice Thomas's majority opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Breyer, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh in full, and by Justice Ginsburg as to all but Part III-B-2. Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justice Kagan.
To discuss the case, we have Hon. Paul D. Clement, Partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Stephen A. Vaden, General Counsel at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.
Per Justice Thomas's opinion for the Court: "We granted certiorari in these consolidated cases to decide whether the United States Forest Service has authority under the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U. S. C. §181 et seq., to grant rights-of-way through lands within national forests traversed by the Appalachian Trail. 588 U. S. ___ (2019). We hold that the Mineral Leasing Act does grant the Forest Service that authority and therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit."
Justice Thomas's majority opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Breyer, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh in full, and by Justice Ginsburg as to all but Part III-B-2. Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justice Kagan.
To discuss the case, we have Hon. Paul D. Clement, Partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Stephen A. Vaden, General Counsel at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.
SCOTUScast - McGirt v. Oklahoma – Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On July 9, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in McGirt v. Oklahoma. Jimcy McGirt sought post-conviction relief of three major sexual assault convictions, arguing his crimes occurred in Indian Country and thus were subject to the Indian Major Crimes Act. If that law applies, Mr. McGirt’s crimes should have been prosecuted in federal, rather than state court.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of McGirt, holding that land in northeastern Oklahoma--reserved for the Creek Nation since the 19th century-- remains a reservation in accordance with a federal statute that gives the federal government jurisdiction to try certain major crimes committed by Indians in Indian country. Therefore, Oklahoma state courts did not have jurisdiction to convict Mr. McGirt.
To discuss this case and its implications, we have Andy Lester, partner at Spencer Fane LLP.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of McGirt, holding that land in northeastern Oklahoma--reserved for the Creek Nation since the 19th century-- remains a reservation in accordance with a federal statute that gives the federal government jurisdiction to try certain major crimes committed by Indians in Indian country. Therefore, Oklahoma state courts did not have jurisdiction to convict Mr. McGirt.
To discuss this case and its implications, we have Andy Lester, partner at Spencer Fane LLP.
Strict Scrutiny - How To Train Your Killer Whale
Leah Melissa, Jaime, and Kate recap the last term -- high points (flushgate), low points (you’ve heard some of these before), and everything in between. They also discuss the psychology behind how to train our country’s new median #SCOTUS killer whale, John Roberts. Oh, and there are LOTS of announcements and breaking news on this episode too.
Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025!
- 6/12 – NYC
- 10/4 – Chicago
Learn more: http://crooked.com/events
Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts - Coming Soon
Who were the nine other women of Harvard Law School's class of 1959? Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg remembers them all.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Opening Arguments - OA404: Rule of Law Not Found
AKA the Roger Stone scandal. Trump has overloaded our ability to be angry and made us swallow outrage after outrage like Joey Chestnut eating hot dogs. But don't worry because Andrew is our Upton Sinclair telling us just what the hell is in these things. This one is a doozy. The Roger Stone commutation is absolutely a scandal, and in a just world would result in a swift impeachment and conviction. Before that, we've got updates on the Flynn case. What's happening there, and will the OA Amicus Brief(s) make any difference? Find out!
Some links: Rule 35. En Banc Determination | Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; FRAP rule 40; Sullivan Moves for Rehearing En Banc; Local DC Circuit Rules; Trump Uses Pardon Power Differently Than Other Presidents, Scholars Say; Meet the Acting Pardon Attorney; OA90: Pardon Me? Yes, Donald Trump Can Pardon Himself; 7 13 20 Stone Filing Commutation; 28 CFR § 1.3 - Eligibility for filing petition for commutation of sentence; Roger Stone says McCarthy, Stefanik advocated against preelection clemency
SCOTUScast - Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru – Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On July 8, 2020 the Supreme Court decided Our Lady of Guadalupe v. Morrissey Berru. In a 7-2 ruling, the court held that that a “ministerial exemption” derived from the First Amendment prevents civil courts from adjudicating schoolteacher Morrisey-Berru’s age discrimination claim. Justice Alito, writing for the majority, held that the process of identifying religious ministers within a specific faith group must be largely left up to that particular faith group, resulting in the reversal of the Ninth Circuits determination that Morrissey-Berru was not a minister.
Joining us to discuss this case and its implications is Daniel Blomberg, Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
Joining us to discuss this case and its implications is Daniel Blomberg, Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
SCOTUScast - Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania – Post-Decision SCOTUScast
On July 8, 2020 the Supreme Court decided Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania, upholding in a 7-2 ruling a federal rule exempting employers with religious or moral objections from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees under the Affordable Care Act. To discuss this case and its implications, we have Eric Kniffin, Partner at Lewis Roca Rothberger Christie LLP.