SCOTUS Watch …
This week, the Supreme Court will be releasing opinions on Monday, Wednesday and Thursday morning at 10am Eastern. SCOTUSblog will liveblog here today starting at 9:15 Eastern for Orders. From SCOTUSblog: “The Court is scheduled to sit for a non-argument session on Monday, June 30.” That means 4 more days of opinions.
SCOTUSblog: October 2013 Term, major cases pending
McCullen v. Coakley, No. 12-1168 [Arg: 1.15.2014 Trans./Aud.]Issue(s): (1) Whether the First Circuit erred in upholding Massachusetts’s selective exclusion law – which makes it a crime for speakers other than clinic “employees or agents . . . acting within the scope of their employment” to “enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk” within thirty-five feet of an entrance, exit, or driveway of “a reproductive health care facility” – under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, on its face and as applied to petitioners; (2) whether, if Hill v. Colorado permits enforcement of this law, Hill should be limited or overruled.
~
National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, No. 12-1281 [Arg: 1.13.2014 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): (1) Whether the President’s recess-appointment power may be exercised during a recess that occurs within a session of the Senate, or is instead limited to recesses that occur between enumerated sessions of the Senate; (2) whether the President’s recess-appointment power may be exercised to fill vacancies that exist during a recess, or is instead limited to vacancies that first arose during that recess; and (3) whether the President’s recess-appointment power may be exercised when the Senate is convening every three days in pro forma sessions.
~
Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius, No. 13-356 [Arg: 3.25.2014 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the religious owners of a family business, or their closely held, for-profit corporation, have free exercise rights that are violated by the application of the contraceptive-coverage mandate of the Affordable Care Act.
Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, No. 13-354 [Arg: 3.25.2014 Trans.]
Issue(s): Whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb et seq., which provides that the government “shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion” unless that burden is the least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest, allows a for-profit corporation to deny its employees the health coverage of contraceptives to which the employees are otherwise entitled by federal law, based on the religious objections of the corporation’s owners.
~
Riley v. California, No. 13-132 [Arg: 4.29.2014 Trans.]
Issue(s): Whether evidence admitted at petitioner’s trial was obtained in a search of petitioner’s cell phone that violated petitioner’s Fourth Amendment rights.
More news …
News and Views …
Sotomayor on Clinton and Costco
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is offering the back story behind her encounter with Hillary Clinton at a Virginia Costco last weekend.
Everybody is telling me there were signs [for Clinton] out front,” Sotomayor said. “And I went through the side door, so there were no signs at the side door. Hence, I didn’t know. And a nice lady at the pharmacy counter recognized me and we started chatting.
“And she says, are you here with the other lady? And I said what other lady?” Sotomayor continued. “And she mentioned Madam Secretary. And that’s how I found out.”
There, she promised to read Clinton’s book.
“Well, you better!” Clinton said, according to news accounts from the time. “I loved yours.”
Sotomayor discussed her book, “My Beloved World,” during the ABC interview.
Smartypants: Republican rhetoric is dangerous
Over the last six years, we’ve seen challenges to the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency take the form of demands to see his birth certificate, threats to blow up the global economy if he doesn’t comply with Republican demands, and a government shutdown …
And now George Will has joined the chorus with a column titled Stopping a Lawless President.
… especially in our polarized political climate – this kind of talk is dangerous. I hope I don’t have to lay out why. I’ll simply say that promoting the idea of a “lawless” president in the minds of those who are already considering “second amendment remedies” is a recipe for disaster. While establishment Republicans attempt to calm the fires they ignited with their radical fringe back in 2010, this kind of rhetoric simply throws gasoline on the flames.
Like this?
Bobby Jindal Predicts ‘Growing Rebellion’ Will Execute ‘Hostile Takeover’ of Washington D.C.
Disabled Recipients of Social Security Fund Face Hefty Benefits Cut
Congressional gridlock is threatening the already thin lifeline of Social Security benefits that nearly 9 million disabled American workers rely on to feed, clothe and shelter their families.[…]
Playing chicken with the trust fund would be devastating, Ruffing said. “If Congress allows the disability trust fund to run dry, then what will happen is benefits to all recipients will be cut by approximately 20 percent, which is obviously an unacceptable outcome,” she said. “It’s a completely unnecessary form of brinkmanship.” […]
“We find that DI payments account for the majority of family income for nearly half of all beneficiaries,” a 2013 Urban Institute report said. “Many DI beneficiaries live in poverty.”
Right-wing reaction? “There are 9 million moochers mooching off of us?!??”. Sigh.
Editor’s Note: Feel free to share other news stories in the comments.
13 comments