McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission
The case McCutcheon v. FEC will be argued on Tuesday, October 8. This is the biggest campaign finance reform case since Citizens United was decided in 2010. Learn the facts behind the case from ISCOTUS Director and Professor Carolyn Shapiro of IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.
The 2012 Term of the Supreme Court wrapped up with many important decisions. The faculty of Chicago-Kent College of Law goes behind the decisions to explain what happened, why, and what it means for the future.
Vance v. Ball State University
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar
The Supreme Court decided two cases on workplace harassment in the 2012 Term: Vance v. Ball State University and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar. Professor Laurie Leader of Chicago-Kent College of Law explains these Title VII cases and what their decisions mean.
In Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court found that Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional. But the Voting Rights Act isn’t gone. Professor Carolyn Shapiro (Chicago-Kent College of Law) explains the decision and what it means for the future of voting rights law.
The Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act this Term by declaring it unconstitutional. This historic decision has many important implications for the future. Get the facts on where same-sex marriage now stands from Chicago-Kent Professor Katharine Baker, who submitted an amicus brief on behalf of family law professors to the case.
The Supreme Court decided the proponents of Proposition 8 did not have legal standing to challenge the California Supreme Court’s ruling that it was unconstitutional. How did the Court decide? Professor Joan Steinman of IIT Chicago-Kent explains.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Fisher v. University of Texas didn’t make any sweeping declarations on affirmative action. In a 7-1 decision (with Justice Kagan recusing herself), the Court sent the case back to the lower courts. Distinguished Professor Sheldon H. Nahmod, who has argued on civil rights in the Supreme Court, explains what the decision means.
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
In the most recent Term, the Supreme Court held in a 9-0 decision that human genes could not be patented. Chicago-Kent Professor of Law David Schwartz explains the decision and why it was made.
Prof. Richard Kling discusses the Court’s recent decision on the taking of DNA from arrestees.
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.