Case:
Prof. Sanford Greenberg discusses the Supreme Court’s upcoming review of whether the Constitution’s protection against self-incrimination applies before an individual has been arrested or read his rights.
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 … Continue reading Guest Post: Follow the Final Month of the Supreme Court’s October Term 2012
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 … Continue reading Today’s Rulings On Habeas Corpus
Today, the Supreme Court issued decisions in four cases. All but one were unanimous as to result, and that one, City of Arlington v. FCC, though important in administrative law, is not a case most members of the public are likely to be following. This may lead some people to wonder what the Supreme Court … Continue reading What’s going on at the Supreme Court?
Case: Boyer v. Louisiana At oral argument in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Prop 8 case, Justice Kennedy openly wondered whether the case had been “properly granted” and hinted that an appropriate resolution might be to dismiss it as improvidently granted (or DIG it, in the shorthand of the Court. A DIG would mean that the … Continue reading A hint on Hollingsworth from a criminal case?
Yesterday, the Court announced its opinion in the case of Genesis Health Care v. Symczyk. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that if a plaintiff’s individual claim becomes moot before a collective action is certified in a Fair Labor Standard Act case, the whole case is moot. But the Court assumed, without deciding, that … Continue reading A Sharp Dissent
Prof. Sanford Greenberg discusses the Supreme Court’s upcoming review of whether the Constitution’s protection against self-incrimination applies before an individual has been arrested or read his rights.
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
Prof. Lori Andrews discusses an upcoming intellectual property case dealing with whether human genes can be patented.
Case: Hollingsworth v. Perry Adam Liptak of the New York Times has a very interesting and insightful article arguing that the conservative justices were the ones who originally wanted to hear the Prop 8 case.
Case: United States v. Windsor IIT Chicago-Kent faculty discussed the same sex marriage cases at a forum on Wednesday. Watch it here.
Case: United States v. Windsor In the second of two same-sex marriage cases, the Court on Wednesday will consider the constitutionality of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Oyez will have audio from the arguments by 2:00 PM Eastern Time, and a synchronized, searchable transcript will follow roughly 2 hours later. UPDATE: The audio and … Continue reading DOMA Arguments