Last month, in her dissent in Yates v. U.S., Justice Kagan reminded us again of why she has earned a reputation for her readable, engaging, even entertaining opinions. Yates involved a prosecution of a fisherman under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. After a federal agent found that the fisherman had some undersized red grouper in violation of … Continue reading Are You Talking To Me? The Justices and Their Audience
So now that we’ve had (if not yet heard) oral arguments in King v. Burwell, the Affordable Care Act’s second round at the Supreme Court, what have we learned about where the justices stand on this stunningly consequential case? Not all that much, I would say. Court watchers have developed a relatively predictable script for … Continue reading Following the Script: The ACA at the Supreme Court, Round 2
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Obamacare case, King v. Burwell, on Wednesday in 90 minutes of extended oral argument. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 19 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 63% of the time, which means I have fallen off … Continue reading Predicting the Winner in King v. Burwell–Will Obamacare stand?
The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments on Tuesday. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 18 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 66.7% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. The first case, … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in LA v. Patel and Davis v. Ayala
The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments on Monday. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 17 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 65% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. Both of today’s … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in AZ Legislature v. AZ Indep. Redistricting and Ohio v. Clark
On Tuesday of this past week, the Court heard two oral arguments. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 17 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 65% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. The … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Henderson v. US and Tibble v. Edison Int’l
The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments on Wednesday. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 17 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 65% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. The first case, … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch and Baker Botts v. ASARCO
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases. The Court was somewhat light in asking questions after several weeks off from oral argument. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After going a perfect 6 for 6 in calling the first decisions handed down, I … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Kerry v. Din and Coleman v. Tollefson
Justice Ginsburg’s frequent and increasingly candid off-the-bench statements have elicited praise and condemnation from predictable sources. Fueled by social media, she has achieved an almost cultish celebrity status, her every remark cherished by her admirers, her face featured on “Notorious RBG” t-shirts. Although Justice Scalia has an army of faithful followers and Justice Sotomayor has … Continue reading Half a Cheer for Justice Ginsburg’s Celebrity Turn
The big same-sex marriage case. We now know it’s coming (arguments in April). We’re pretty sure we know how it’s going to come out (same-sex marriage bans will fall across the nation). And assuming it comes out the way we think it will, when it comes down, sometime in late June, we know it will … Continue reading The Waiting Game