News, OT 2012

What Are They Doing? Why Does It Take So Long?

As we all wait for decisions in this Term’s major cases, people may wonder what is taking so long and why the big cases are so often the last cases to be announced. The short answer is that the big cases are also those in which there is most likely to be fairly strong disagreement among the justices, meaning that there are likely to be multiple opinions — and when that happens, the process can take some time. Here’s a quick primer on what happens:

Continue reading →

Fourth Amendment, OT 2012

Maryland v. King Decision Allows DNA Swabs In Serious Arrests

Case:

Maryland v. King

This morning, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 opinion, with a scathing dissent from Justice Scalia. But the case, Maryland v. King, is not one of the big marquee cases of this Term, nor was the line-up predictable. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy held that the Fourth Amendment allows a state to take a DNA sample using a cheek swab from all individuals arrested for serious crimes. He was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and by Justices Alito, Breyer, and Thomas. Justice Scalia, who dissented orally this morning after Justice Kennedy announced the opinion, was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor.

The difference in the line-up today and in Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders is interesting. In that case, in which the Court upheld the routine strip search of non-violent arrestees (at least under some circumstances), Justice Scalia was in the majority upholding a state practice against a Fourth Amendment challenge, while Justice Breyer was the scathing dissenter. All the other votes tracked today’s case.

Affirmative Action, OT 2012, Same Sex Marriage

Recapping the Same-Sex Marriage and Affirmative Action Cases

Video

Case:

Hollingsworth v. Perry

If you’re looking to refresh your memory on some of the big cases still awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision, take a look at the videos provided by Chicago-Kent’s Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States (ISCOTUS).

Same-sex marriage

Discover information on the politics, the background, and the issues involved in the two same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court in our Deep Dive. These videos discuss the basics of both Hollingsworth v. Perry (the Prop 8 case) and United States v. Windsor (the DOMA case).

Affirmative action

Professors Carolyn Shapiro (ISCOTUS Director and Associate Professor of Law) and Sheldon Nahmod (Distinguished Professor of Law) discuss the details in Fisher v. University of Texas.

The Arguments

The Background

To stay updated with the latest in Supreme Court commentary, subscribe to ISCOTUSnow’s YouTube channel.

OT 2012

Guest Post: Follow the Final Month of the Supreme Court’s October Term 2012

By Tom Gaylord, originally published on the IIT Chicago-Kent Law Library Blog.

As we enter June, we also enter the final month, for all intents and purposes, of October Term 2012 (OT 2012) of the Supreme Court (I say “for all intents and purposes” because although the Court’s Term will not actually end until the opening of OT 2013 on October 7, 2013, the Court traditionally issues it final decisions in argued cases during the last week of June). Thus far, the Court has issued opinions in 45 argued cases, as well as 4 per curiam opinions in cases decided without argument.

Continue reading →

OT 2012

Today’s Rulings On Habeas Corpus

Case:

Trevino v. Thaler

The Supreme Court today issued opinions in two cases involving procedures for habeas corpus, specifically in the context of individuals who are challenging their state-court convictions or capital sentences. Habeas allows these individuals to allege that their convictions are invalid due to constitutional defects in the trials. Winning such a claim is very, very difficult. The legal doctrine is very restrictive, thanks to both Congress, which passed the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) in 1996, and to years of highly restrictive Supreme Court precedent. Today, however, both cases inched open doors for habeas petitioners.

Continue reading →