Sorry

This feed does not validate.

In addition, interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations.

Source: http://www.scotusblog.com/?feed=rss2&cat=150%2C151%2C76%2C156%2C157%2C72%2C75%2C60%2C850%2C220%2C15

  1. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
  2. xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
  3. xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  4. xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  5. xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
  6. xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  7. xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
  8. >
  9.  
  10. <channel>
  11. <title>SCOTUSblog</title>
  12. <atom:link href="https://www.scotusblog.com/feed/?amp%3Bcat=150%2C151%2C76%2C156%2C157%2C72%2C75%2C60%2C850%2C220%2C15" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
  13. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/</link>
  14. <description>Independent News and Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court</description>
  15. <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 14:21:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
  16. <language>en-US</language>
  17. <sy:updatePeriod>
  18. hourly </sy:updatePeriod>
  19. <sy:updateFrequency>
  20. 1 </sy:updateFrequency>
  21. <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3</generator>
  22.  
  23. 
  30. <item>
  31. <title>The morning read for Friday, May 3</title>
  32. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-friday-may-3/</link>
  34. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellena Erskine]]></dc:creator>
  35. <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 14:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
  36. <category><![CDATA[Round-up]]></category>
  37. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316207</guid>
  38.  
  39. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Friday, May 3" title="The morning read for Friday, May 3" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read: Supreme Court’s next chapter on abortion puts women’s health in its crosshairs (Kelsey Reichmann, Courthouse News Service) Advocates say Supreme...</p>
  40. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-friday-may-3/">The morning read for Friday, May 3</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  41. ]]></description>
  42. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Friday, May 3" title="The morning read for Friday, May 3" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-may-3%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20May%203" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-may-3%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20May%203" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-may-3%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20May%203" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-may-3%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20May%203" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-may-3%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20May%203" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-may-3%2F&#038;title=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20May%203" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-friday-may-3/" data-a2a-title="The morning read for Friday, May 3">Share</a></p><p>Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read:</p>
  43. <ul>
  44. <li><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/supreme-courts-next-chapter-on-abortion-puts-womens-health-in-its-crosshairs/">Supreme Court’s next chapter on abortion puts women’s health in its crosshairs</a> (Kelsey Reichmann, Courthouse News Service)</li>
  45. <li><a href="https://apnews.com/article/louisiana-black-house-district-2024-election-1ed871b6da43ebd571fe728e71157519#">Advocates say Supreme Court must preserve new, mostly Black US House district for 2024 elections</a> (Kevin McGill, The Associated Press)</li>
  46. <li><a href="https://19thnews.org/2024/05/supreme-court-gender-affirming-care-idaho-tennessee/">Where does the Supreme Court stand on gender-affirming care bans?</a> (Orion Rummler, The 19th)</li>
  47. <li><a href="https://www.ft.com/content/8729aeee-0613-4c38-8c7a-27ab8f9a676e">Former Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer: ‘Are you kidding? You’ll get more cases than ever!’</a> (Stefania Palma, The Financial Times)</li>
  48. <li><a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/05/florida-six-week-abortion-ban-only-the-beginning.html">The Six-Week Abortion Ban in Florida Is Only the Beginning</a> (Mary Ziegler, Slate)</li>
  49. </ul>
  50. <p class="p1">&nbsp;</p>
  51. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-friday-may-3/">The morning read for Friday, May 3</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  52. ]]></content:encoded>
  56. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  57. </item>
  58. <item>
  59. <title>Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction</title>
  60. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/canadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction/</link>
  62. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Kalvis Golde]]></dc:creator>
  63. <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2024 15:08:03 +0000</pubDate>
  64. <category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
  65. <category><![CDATA[Cases in the Pipeline]]></category>
  66. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316202</guid>
  67.  
  68. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="144" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Banner141203-150x144.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction" title="Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here. The vast majority of criminal cases – 98% of those in federal court, and 95% of those...</p>
  69. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/canadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction/">Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  70. ]]></description>
  71. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="144" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Banner141203-150x144.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction" title="Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fcanadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction%2F&amp;linkname=Canadian%20formerly%20held%20at%20Guantanamo%20seeks%20to%20erase%20terrorism%20conviction" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fcanadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction%2F&amp;linkname=Canadian%20formerly%20held%20at%20Guantanamo%20seeks%20to%20erase%20terrorism%20conviction" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fcanadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction%2F&amp;linkname=Canadian%20formerly%20held%20at%20Guantanamo%20seeks%20to%20erase%20terrorism%20conviction" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fcanadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction%2F&amp;linkname=Canadian%20formerly%20held%20at%20Guantanamo%20seeks%20to%20erase%20terrorism%20conviction" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fcanadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction%2F&amp;linkname=Canadian%20formerly%20held%20at%20Guantanamo%20seeks%20to%20erase%20terrorism%20conviction" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fcanadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction%2F&#038;title=Canadian%20formerly%20held%20at%20Guantanamo%20seeks%20to%20erase%20terrorism%20conviction" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/canadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction/" data-a2a-title="Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction">Share</a></p><p><em>The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of </em><a href="about:blank#cert_petitions_explained"><em>cert petitions</em></a><em> recently filed in the Supreme Court. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available </em><a href="about:blank"><em>here</em></a><em>.</em></p>
  72. <p>The vast majority of criminal cases – <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/publications/criminal-justice-magazine/2024/winter/fourteen-principles-path-forward-plea-bargaining-reform/#:~:text=Plea%20bargaining%20accounts%20for%20almost,of%20trials.">98% of those in federal court, and 95% of those in state court</a> – are resolved through plea bargains. As a condition for pursuing a lesser conviction or shorter sentence, prosecutors may also require someone who pleads guilty to a crime to sign away their right to appeal. This week, we highlight petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether a plea deal with an explicit waiver of the right to appeal bars defendants from later asking a court to vacate their conviction if the conduct of which they were accused, it turns out, was not a crime at all.</p>
  73. <p>Omar Khadr was 15 when U.S. military forces in Afghanistan invaded a suspected al Qaeda compound where he lived. During the invasion, Khadr threw a hand grenade that killed a U.S. soldier; Khadr was then shot by U.S. forces. The U.S. military took Khadr into custody, provided him with medical care, and sent him to the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.<span id="more-316202"></span></p>
  74. <p>Four years into Khadr’s detention, the Bush administration enacted the Military Commissions Act of 2006. The law gave military tribunals the power to try “unlawful enemy combatants” for a list of terrorism-related crimes, and it established a new military review court in Washington to hear appeals.</p>
  75. <p>In 2007, charges against Khadr were referred to a military tribunal. Khadr pleaded guilty to all five of the charges against him, including providing material support for terrorism, in front of a military commission at the Guantanamo naval base. His guilty plea contained an express waiver of his right to appeal. The commission sentenced Khadr to 40 years in prison.</p>
  76. <p>The Obama administration agreed in 2012 to transfer Khadr, who is a Canadian citizen, to Canada to serve the remainder of his sentence there. A Canadian court ultimately released him on bail in 2015 and commuted his sentence in 2019.</p>
  77. <p>The same year that U.S. authorities transferred Khadr to Canada, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit – the federal court of appeals that presides over the Bush administration’s military review court – issued a ruling on the 2006 law under which Khadr was convicted. In an opinion by then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the court held that military commissions lacked the powerto try individuals for offenses – such as material support for terrorism – that were not designated as war crimes before the law’s enactment.</p>
  78. <p>While still in prison in Canada, Khadr asked a military review court in Washington to wipe his conviction off the books. He argued that because the acts to which he pled guilty occurred in 2002, his conviction violated the U.S. Constitution’s ban on convicting someone of a crime for conduct that was not against the law when it was committed. The military review court dismissed Khadr’s challenge, finding he had waived his right to appeal when he pleaded guilty over a decade before.</p>
  79. <p>A divided panel of the D.C. Circuit agreed with that ruling. The majority reasoned that, when Khadr pleaded guilty, he signed a general waiver agreeing not to appeal for any reason. The court held that challenging a conviction as invalid on its face under the Constitution is not exempt from this waiver, so that Khadr was barred from raising it after the fact.</p>
  80. <p>In <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/khadr-v-united-states/"><em>Khadr v. United States</em></a>, Khadr asks the justices to grant review and reverse the D.C. Circuit’s ruling. He argues that the courts of appeals are divided over whether criminal defendants can&nbsp; ever waive their right to argue that their conviction was legally invalid by pleading guilty. Just as “[p]lea agreements based upon non-criminal conduct cannot” support a conviction, Khadr writes, nor do general waivers of appeal “bar appellants from seeking review of their convictions for conduct that is not criminal.”</p>
  81. <p>A list of this week’s featured petitions is below:</p>
  82. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/advocate-christ-medical-center-v-becerra/"><em>Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Becerra</em></a><br />
  83. 23-715<br />
  84. <strong>Issue</strong>: Whether the phrase “entitled &#8230; to benefits,” used twice in the same sentence of the&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-42-the-public-health-and-welfare/chapter-7-social-security/subchapter-xviii-health-insurance-for-aged-and-disabled/part-e-miscellaneous-provisions/section-1395ww-payments-to-hospitals-for-inpatient-hospital-services">Medicare Act</a>, means the same thing for Medicare part A and Supplemental Social Security benefits, such that it includes all who meet basic program eligibility criteria, whether or not benefits are actually received.</p>
  85. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/khadr-v-united-states/"><em>Khadr v. United States</em></a><br />
  86. 23-720<br />
  87. <strong>Issue</strong>: Whether a plea agreement that includes a general appellate waiver forecloses a direct appeal when a defendant has pled guilty to conduct that was not criminal.</p>
  88. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/diaz-v-polanco/"><em>Diaz v. Polanco</em></a><br />
  89. 23-722<br />
  90. <strong>Issue</strong>: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit improperly denied qualified immunity to prison officials in these cases by defining the relevant law at a high level of generality and failing to identify any precedent recognizing a constitutional violation on similar facts.</p>
  91. <p><em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/ahmed-v-securities-and-exchange-commission/">Ahmed v. Securities and Exchange Commission</a></em><br />
  92. 23-741<br />
  93. <strong>Issue</strong>: Whether the cross-appeal rule, which prohibits the granting of a remedy in favor of an appellee absent the filing of a cross-appeal, is jurisdictional or otherwise mandatory, or instead admits of any exception, including, among other things, for remands or changes in substantive law.</p>
  94. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/consumers-research-v-federal-communications-commission/"><em>Consumers’ Research v. Federal Communications Commission</em></a><br />
  95. 23-743<br />
  96. <strong>Issues</strong>: (1) Whether&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-47-telecommunications/chapter-5-wire-or-radio-communication/subchapter-ii-common-carriers/part-ii-development-of-competitive-markets/section-254-universal-service">47 U.S.C. § 254</a>&nbsp;violates the nondelegation doctrine by imposing no limit on the Federal Communications Commission’s power to raise revenue for the Universal Service Fund; and (2) whether the FCC violated the private nondelegation doctrine by transferring its revenue-raising power to a private company run by industry interest groups.</p>
  97. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/canadian-formerly-held-at-guantanamo-seeks-to-erase-terrorism-conviction/">Canadian formerly held at Guantanamo seeks to erase terrorism conviction</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  98. ]]></content:encoded>
  102. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Banner141203-150x144.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>144</height></post-thumbnail>
  103. </item>
  104. <item>
  105. <title>The morning read for Thursday, May 2</title>
  106. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2/</link>
  108. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellena Erskine]]></dc:creator>
  109. <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2024 14:03:14 +0000</pubDate>
  110. <category><![CDATA[Round-up]]></category>
  111. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316200</guid>
  112.  
  113. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Thursday, May 2" title="The morning read for Thursday, May 2" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Thursday morning read: How an Ordinary Guy Took a $3,000 Case to the Supreme Court (Ben Foldy, The Wall Street Journal) Senators seek...</p>
  114. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2/">The morning read for Thursday, May 2</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  115. ]]></description>
  116. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Thursday, May 2" title="The morning read for Thursday, May 2" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Thursday%2C%20May%202" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Thursday%2C%20May%202" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Thursday%2C%20May%202" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Thursday%2C%20May%202" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Thursday%2C%20May%202" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2%2F&#038;title=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Thursday%2C%20May%202" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2/" data-a2a-title="The morning read for Thursday, May 2">Share</a></p><p>Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Thursday morning read:</p>
  117. <ul>
  118. <li><a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/small-claims-case-goes-to-supreme-court-b24ac380">How an Ordinary Guy Took a $3,000 Case to the Supreme Court</a> (Ben Foldy, The Wall Street Journal)</li>
  119. <li><a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/senators-seek-supreme-court-intervention-in-epa-smog-fight/">Senators seek Supreme Court intervention in EPA smog fight</a> (Sean Reilly, E&amp;E News)&nbsp;</li>
  120. <li><a href="https://www.ktvu.com/aapi/petition-to-honor-mitsuye-endo-and-her-historic-supreme-court-victory">Petition to honor Mitsuye Endo and her historic Supreme Court victory</a> (Jana Katsuyama, Fox KTVU Fox 2)</li>
  121. <li><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/trump-immunity-plea-sets-up-test-for-supreme-court-on-judicial-restraint/">Trump immunity plea sets up test for Supreme Court on judicial restraint</a> (Kelsey Reichmann, Courthouse News Service)</li>
  122. <li><a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-supreme-court-is-doing-right-in-considering-trumps-immunity-case-229101">What the Supreme Court is doing right in considering Trump’s immunity case</a> (Claire Wofford, The Conversation)</li>
  123. </ul>
  124. <p class="p1">&nbsp;</p>
  125. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-thursday-may-2/">The morning read for Thursday, May 2</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  126. ]]></content:encoded>
  130. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  131. </item>
  132. <item>
  133. <title>The morning read for Wednesday, May 1</title>
  134. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1/</link>
  136. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellena Erskine]]></dc:creator>
  137. <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2024 14:04:50 +0000</pubDate>
  138. <category><![CDATA[Round-up]]></category>
  139. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316197</guid>
  140.  
  141. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Wednesday, May 1" title="The morning read for Wednesday, May 1" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read: Supreme Court declines to block Texas pornography restriction (Lawrence Hurley, NBC News) Trucker failed drug test after taking CBD supplement....</p>
  142. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1/">The morning read for Wednesday, May 1</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  143. ]]></description>
  144. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Wednesday, May 1" title="The morning read for Wednesday, May 1" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Wednesday%2C%20May%201" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Wednesday%2C%20May%201" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Wednesday%2C%20May%201" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Wednesday%2C%20May%201" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Wednesday%2C%20May%201" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F05%2Fthe-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1%2F&#038;title=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Wednesday%2C%20May%201" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1/" data-a2a-title="The morning read for Wednesday, May 1">Share</a></p><p>Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read:</p>
  145. <ul>
  146. <li><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-declines-block-texas-pornography-restriction-rcna149877">Supreme Court declines to block Texas pornography restriction</a> (Lawrence Hurley, NBC News)</li>
  147. <li><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/29/supreme-court-cbd-supplement-rico/73386909007/">Trucker failed drug test after taking CBD supplement. Supreme Court to decide if he can sue</a> (Maureen Groppe, USA Today)</li>
  148. <li><a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/jones-day-leads-in-supreme-court-arguments-with-new-faces">Jones Day Leads in Supreme Court Arguments With New Faces</a> (Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson, Bloomberg Law)</li>
  149. <li><a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/justice-stephen-breyers-blunt-message-supreme-court-conservatives/story?id=109592986">Justice Stephen Breyer&#8217;s blunt message to Supreme Court conservatives: &#8216;Slow down&#8217;</a> (Devin Dwyer, Patty See, &amp; Sarah Herndon, ABC News)</li>
  150. <li><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/05/01/amy-coney-barrett-handmaid-justice-conservative/">Amy Coney Barrett is no handmaid to the Supreme Court’s conservative majority</a> (Ruth Marcus, The Washington Post)</li>
  151. </ul>
  152. <p class="p1">&nbsp;</p>
  153. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/the-morning-read-for-wednesday-may-1/">The morning read for Wednesday, May 1</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  154. ]]></content:encoded>
  158. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  159. </item>
  160. <item>
  161. <title>Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites</title>
  162. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites/</link>
  164. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Amy Howe]]></dc:creator>
  165. <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:19:55 +0000</pubDate>
  166. <category><![CDATA[Emergency appeals and applications]]></category>
  167. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316189</guid>
  168.  
  169. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites" title="Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to temporarily block a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify their users’ ages. In a brief unsigned order, the justices turned down a request from a group of challengers that included an adult industry trade association to...</p>
  170. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites/">Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  171. ]]></description>
  172. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites" title="Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fcourt-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites%2F&amp;linkname=Court%20allows%20Texas%20to%20enforce%20age%20verification%20for%20online%20porn%20sites" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fcourt-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites%2F&amp;linkname=Court%20allows%20Texas%20to%20enforce%20age%20verification%20for%20online%20porn%20sites" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fcourt-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites%2F&amp;linkname=Court%20allows%20Texas%20to%20enforce%20age%20verification%20for%20online%20porn%20sites" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fcourt-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites%2F&amp;linkname=Court%20allows%20Texas%20to%20enforce%20age%20verification%20for%20online%20porn%20sites" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fcourt-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites%2F&amp;linkname=Court%20allows%20Texas%20to%20enforce%20age%20verification%20for%20online%20porn%20sites" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fcourt-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites%2F&#038;title=Court%20allows%20Texas%20to%20enforce%20age%20verification%20for%20online%20porn%20sites" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites/" data-a2a-title="Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites">Share</a></p><p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to temporarily block a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify their users’ ages. In a brief unsigned order, the justices turned down a request from a group of challengers that included an adult industry trade association to put the law on hold to give them time to seek review of a ruling by a federal appeals court.</p>
  173. <p>There were no public dissents from Tuesday’s order.</p>
  174. <p>The law, known as H.B. 1181, was originally slated to go into effect last September. But the challengers, led by the Free Speech Coalition, went to federal court in August, challenging the law’s constitutionality.</p>
  175. <p>Senior U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra barred the state from enforcing the age-verification requirement, concluding that it likely violated the First Amendment. By requiring adults to submit personal data, Ezra reasoned, the law would discourage adults from accessing the websites because of concerns about identity theft and extortion. Moreover, Ezra added, other alternatives – such as content-filtering systems – are better suited to achieve the state’s goal of shielding children from sexual content.<span id="more-316189"></span></p>
  176. <p>The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit put Ezra’s order on hold while the state appealed, and in March a divided panel of the court of appeals issued a decision vacating Ezra’s injunction as it applied to the age-verification provision.</p>
  177. <p>The challengers came to the Supreme Court earlier this month, asking the Supreme Court to intervene. They argued that the court is likely to grant review and reverse the 5th Circuit’s decision, contending that the case implicates “the uniform and faithful application of this Court’s precedents to the modern-day Internet as novel regulations traverse hallowed First Amendment ground.” Moreover, they added, “[p]rofound irreparable harm flows from” the requirement’s “chilling of adults’ access to protected sexual expression, especially now that Texas is pursuing enforcement proceedings” against websites that do not comply. By contrast, they told the justices, keeping the 5th Circuit’s decision on hold “for a limited time will not harm Texas appreciably.”</p>
  178. <p>Texas urged the justices to allow it to keep the law in place for now, telling them that the law merely “requires the pornography industry that makes billions of dollars peddling smut to take commercially reasonable steps to ensure that those who access the material are adults.” Such a step, the state maintained, is necessary because of the “unprecedented explosion of access to hardcore pornography by kids,” through devices like smartphones, which is in turn “creating a public health crisis.”</p>
  179. <p>Texas pushed back against the challengers’ suggestion that there is any urgency requiring the court to step in. Although the law has been enforceable since last fall, the state observed, when the court of appeals first put Ezra’s order on hold, the challengers “waited more than six months after the 5th Circuit merits panel issued its opinion before coming to this Court.”</p>
  180. <p><em>This article was <a href="https://amylhowe.com/2024/04/30/court-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites/">originally published at Howe on the Court</a>.</em></p>
  181. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-allows-texas-to-enforce-age-verification-for-online-porn-sites/">Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  182. ]]></content:encoded>
  186. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  187. </item>
  188. <item>
  189. <title>The morning read for Tuesday, April 30</title>
  190. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30/</link>
  192. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellena Erskine]]></dc:creator>
  193. <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 13:35:31 +0000</pubDate>
  194. <category><![CDATA[Round-up]]></category>
  195. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316185</guid>
  196.  
  197. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Tuesday, April 30" title="The morning read for Tuesday, April 30" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Tuesday morning read: Supreme Court to hear cases on veterans’ benefits, pet food and visas next term (Justin Jouvenal, The Washington Post) US...</p>
  198. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30/">The morning read for Tuesday, April 30</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  199. ]]></description>
  200. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Tuesday, April 30" title="The morning read for Tuesday, April 30" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Tuesday%2C%20April%2030" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Tuesday%2C%20April%2030" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Tuesday%2C%20April%2030" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Tuesday%2C%20April%2030" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Tuesday%2C%20April%2030" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30%2F&#038;title=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Tuesday%2C%20April%2030" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30/" data-a2a-title="The morning read for Tuesday, April 30">Share</a></p><p>Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Tuesday morning read:</p>
  201. <ul>
  202. <li><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/29/supreme-court-cases-next-term/">Supreme Court to hear cases on veterans’ benefits, pet food and visas next term</a> (Justin Jouvenal, The Washington Post)</li>
  203. <li><a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-elon-musk-dispute-over-sec-settlement-2024-04-29/">US Supreme Court won&#8217;t hear Elon Musk dispute over SEC settlement</a> (John Kruzel, Reuters)</li>
  204. <li><a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/surprising-disturbing-legal-experts-react-supreme-court-arguments/story?id=109748598">&#8216;Surprising&#8217; and &#8216;disturbing&#8217;: Legal experts react to Supreme Court arguments on Trump&#8217;s immunity claim</a> (Alexandra Hutzler, ABC News)</li>
  205. <li><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/29/us/politics/immunity-trump-supreme-court.html">Why an Immunity Ruling in Trump’s Favor Might Not Alter the Shape of His Trial</a> (Charlie Savage, The New York Times)</li>
  206. <li><a href="https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-trump-immunity-other-cases-rcna149803">The Supreme Court has much more than Trump’s immunity claim to resolve</a> (Jordan Rubin, MSNBC)</li>
  207. </ul>
  208. <p class="p1">&nbsp;</p>
  209. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-tuesday-april-30/">The morning read for Tuesday, April 30</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  210. ]]></content:encoded>
  214. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  215. </item>
  216. <item>
  217. <title>Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases</title>
  218. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/supreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases/</link>
  220. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Amy Howe]]></dc:creator>
  221. <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:58:51 +0000</pubDate>
  222. <category><![CDATA[Merits Cases]]></category>
  223. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316182</guid>
  224.  
  225. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Banner200115r-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases" title="Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />In a list of orders released from the justices’ private conference last week, the justices granted review in four cases – adding those cases to the lone four cases that they have agreed to take up for the 2024-25 term since early January. Monday’s grants...</p>
  226. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/supreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases/">Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  227. ]]></description>
  228. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Banner200115r-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases" title="Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fsupreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases%2F&amp;linkname=Supreme%20Court%20takes%20up%20RICO%20and%20veterans%20%E2%80%9Cbenefit%20of%20the%20doubt%E2%80%9D%20cases" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fsupreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases%2F&amp;linkname=Supreme%20Court%20takes%20up%20RICO%20and%20veterans%20%E2%80%9Cbenefit%20of%20the%20doubt%E2%80%9D%20cases" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fsupreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases%2F&amp;linkname=Supreme%20Court%20takes%20up%20RICO%20and%20veterans%20%E2%80%9Cbenefit%20of%20the%20doubt%E2%80%9D%20cases" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fsupreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases%2F&amp;linkname=Supreme%20Court%20takes%20up%20RICO%20and%20veterans%20%E2%80%9Cbenefit%20of%20the%20doubt%E2%80%9D%20cases" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fsupreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases%2F&amp;linkname=Supreme%20Court%20takes%20up%20RICO%20and%20veterans%20%E2%80%9Cbenefit%20of%20the%20doubt%E2%80%9D%20cases" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fsupreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases%2F&#038;title=Supreme%20Court%20takes%20up%20RICO%20and%20veterans%20%E2%80%9Cbenefit%20of%20the%20doubt%E2%80%9D%20cases" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/supreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases/" data-a2a-title="Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases">Share</a></p><p>In <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/042924zor_ihdj.pdf">a list of orders</a> released from the justices’ private conference last week, the justices granted review in four cases – adding those cases to the lone four cases that they have agreed to take up for the 2024-25 term since early January. Monday’s grants involve (among others) the interpretation of federal racketeering laws and the “benefit of the doubt” rule for veterans.</p>
  229. <p>In <em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/medical-marijuana-inc-v-horn/">Medical Marijuana v. Horn</a></em>, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether a commercial truck driver who lost his job after he failed a drug test can bring a claim under federal racketeering laws against the makers of the product that he says was responsible for that failed test.</p>
  230. <p>The driver, Douglas Horn, began taking Dixie X CBD Dew Drops Tincture to relieve chronic pain from injuries he sustained in a serious trucking accident in 2012. Horn and his wife, Cindy Harp-Horn, who was also a truck driver, believed – based on the advertising for the tincture – that the product did not contain THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. Horn and Harp-Horn sought to confirm the absence of THC, however, by watching YouTube videos, reviewing the “frequently asked questions” page on the Dixie X website, and calling the company’s customer service line.<span id="more-316182"></span></p>
  231. <p>After he began using Dixie X, Horn failed a drug test – and, as a result, lost his job and his insurance and pension benefits. Harp-Horn, who had worked with her husband, then quit her job, because she believed it was not safe to work without him.</p>
  232. <p>When an independent lab test confirmed that Dixie X contained THC, Horn filed a lawsuit in federal court in New York under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, alleging that the makers of the product had engaged in mail and wire fraud and that, as a result, he had lost his job and therefore suffered – as RICO requires – an injury to his business or property.</p>
  233. <p>The district court ruled for Medical Marijuana and the other companies on Horn’s RICO claim. It concluded that because Horn’s lost earnings flow from a personal injury – his ingestion of THC – he had not suffered an injury “to business or property” for which he could recover under RICO.</p>
  234. <p>Horn appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which reinstated his RICO claim. It ruled that because RICO’s reference to the term “business” includes “employment,” Horn had indeed suffered an injury to his “business” for purposes of the RICO law. The court of appeals acknowledged that there is no liability under RICO when the “injuries alleged are personal ones,” but it cautioned that “there is no reason to extend that bar to an injury to business or property for which a personal injury was a necessary precursory.”</p>
  235. <p>The companies came to the Supreme Court last fall, asking the justices to take up the case and weigh in. They described the question presented by the case as “critically important,” explaining that “RICO is a frequently litigated federal statute that imposes treble damages and attorneys’ fees.” “If quintessential personal injuries count as injuries to ‘business or property’ just because economic damage inevitably results,” the companies told the justices, “Congress’ careful limitation on civil RICO claims would be toothless.”</p>
  236. <p>Horn urged the justices to allow the 2nd Circuit’s decision to stand and to stay out of the dispute. He contended that the companies’ proposed rule would “override the statute’s text, undermine its purpose, and afford a windfall to criminal enterprises across the country. And the” companies’ petition for review, he argued, “resurrects stale debates over civil RICO’s scope that have little to do with this case.”</p>
  237. <p>After considering the case at their conferences on April 19 and April 24, the justices granted the companies’ petition for review on Monday.</p>
  238. <p>In <em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bufkin-v-mcdonough/">Bufkin v. McDonough</a></em>, the justices agreed to weigh in on the application of the “benefit of the doubt” rule – the idea that a veteran, rather than the government, should receive the benefit of the doubt on close issues involving veterans’ law. The Veterans Benefits Act directs the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to “take due account of the” application of the “benefit of the doubt” rule by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. The question that the justices agreed to decide is whether that means that the Veterans Court is only required to review the factual findings of the Veterans Administration for clear error, or whether it must conduct a more thorough review that looks at whether the veteran actually received the benefit of the doubt on close factual issues.</p>
  239. <p>Joshua Bufkin and Norman Thornton, two veterans who lost in the lower courts, urged the justices to take up their cases, calling the “benefit of the doubt” rule one of “the oldest and most fundamental building blocks of the veterans’ claims system. If left to stand,” they contended, the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit “will severely narrow the Veterans Court’s review, resulting in many veterans being denied benefits which they have earned through their service and to which they are entitled by law.”</p>
  240. <p>The justices granted two other petitions for review on Monday:</p>
  241. <ul>
  242. <li><em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bouarfa-v-mayorkas/">Bouarfa v. Mayorkas</a></em>, involving whether courts can review a decision to revoke approval of a petition for an immigrant visa on the ground that the government had initially misapplied nondiscretionary criteria during the approval process, and when the applicant would have had a right to review of an initial decision denying review of the application; and</li>
  243. <li><em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/royal-canin-u-s-a-inc-v-wullschleger/">Royal Canin U.S.A. v. Wullschleger</a></em>, in which the justices will consider whether a plaintiff – here, a dog owner alleging that the designation of specialized dog food as “prescription” dog food is misleading – whose state-court lawsuit has been transferred by the defendants to federal court can seek to have the case sent back to state court by removing all references to federal law.</li>
  244. </ul>
  245. <p>The four cases granted on Monday will likely be argued in October. The justices’ next regularly scheduled conference is Thursday, May 9; orders from that conference are expected to follow on Monday, May 13, at 9:30 a.m.</p>
  246. <p><em>This article was <a href="https://amylhowe.com/2024/04/29/supreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases/">originally published at Howe on the Court</a>.&nbsp;</em></p>
  247. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/supreme-court-takes-up-rico-and-veterans-benefit-of-the-doubt-cases/">Supreme Court takes up RICO and veterans “benefit of the doubt” cases</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  248. ]]></content:encoded>
  252. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Banner200115r-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  253. </item>
  254. <item>
  255. <title>The morning read for Monday, April 29</title>
  256. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-monday-april-29/</link>
  258. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellena Erskine]]></dc:creator>
  259. <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:16:55 +0000</pubDate>
  260. <category><![CDATA[Round-up]]></category>
  261. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316180</guid>
  262.  
  263. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Monday, April 29" title="The morning read for Monday, April 29" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Monday morning read: Trump immunity fight turns Supreme Court textualists topsy-turvy (Josh Gerstein, Politico)&#160; Supreme Court rejects Elon Musk over agreement with SEC...</p>
  264. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-monday-april-29/">The morning read for Monday, April 29</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  265. ]]></description>
  266. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Monday, April 29" title="The morning read for Monday, April 29" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-monday-april-29%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Monday%2C%20April%2029" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-monday-april-29%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Monday%2C%20April%2029" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-monday-april-29%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Monday%2C%20April%2029" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-monday-april-29%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Monday%2C%20April%2029" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-monday-april-29%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Monday%2C%20April%2029" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-monday-april-29%2F&#038;title=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Monday%2C%20April%2029" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-monday-april-29/" data-a2a-title="The morning read for Monday, April 29">Share</a></p><p>Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Monday morning read:</p>
  267. <ul>
  268. <li><a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/27/supreme-court-trump-immunity-00154744">Trump immunity fight turns Supreme Court textualists topsy-turvy</a> (Josh Gerstein, Politico)&nbsp;</li>
  269. <li><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-elon-musk-agreement-sec-vet-social-media-posts-rcna149579">Supreme Court rejects Elon Musk over agreement with SEC to vet social media posts</a> (Lawrence Hurley, NBC News)</li>
  270. <li><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/29/supreme-court-cbd-supplement-rico/73386909007/">Trucker failed drug test after taking CBD supplement. Supreme Court to decide if he can sue</a> (Maureen Groppe, USA Today)</li>
  271. <li><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/29/us/john-roberts-supreme-court-immunity-abortion.html">Amid Cases on Abortion and Trump, Roberts Reflects on Supreme Court’s Work</a> (Adam Liptak, The New York Times)</li>
  272. <li><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/29/politics/supreme-court-rejects-peter-navarros-get-of-jail-request-again/index.html">Peter Navarro’s get-out-of-jail request is again rejected by the Supreme Court</a> (John Fritze, CNN)</li>
  273. </ul>
  274. <p class="p1">&nbsp;</p>
  275. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-monday-april-29/">The morning read for Monday, April 29</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  276. ]]></content:encoded>
  280. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  281. </item>
  282. <item>
  283. <title>RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt</title>
  284. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/rico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt/</link>
  286. <dc:creator><![CDATA[John Elwood]]></dc:creator>
  287. <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 16:08:56 +0000</pubDate>
  288. <category><![CDATA[Merits Cases]]></category>
  289. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316169</guid>
  290.  
  291. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/cameras-banner-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt" title="RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available here. The Supreme Court is back in the relist business with a vengeance. On Monday, it granted review of the Biden...</p>
  292. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/rico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt/">RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  293. ]]></description>
  294. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/cameras-banner-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt" title="RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Frico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt%2F&amp;linkname=RICO%20injury%2C%20federal%20jurisdiction%2C%20and%20giving%20veterans%20the%20benefit%20of%20the%20doubt" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Frico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt%2F&amp;linkname=RICO%20injury%2C%20federal%20jurisdiction%2C%20and%20giving%20veterans%20the%20benefit%20of%20the%20doubt" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Frico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt%2F&amp;linkname=RICO%20injury%2C%20federal%20jurisdiction%2C%20and%20giving%20veterans%20the%20benefit%20of%20the%20doubt" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Frico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt%2F&amp;linkname=RICO%20injury%2C%20federal%20jurisdiction%2C%20and%20giving%20veterans%20the%20benefit%20of%20the%20doubt" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Frico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt%2F&amp;linkname=RICO%20injury%2C%20federal%20jurisdiction%2C%20and%20giving%20veterans%20the%20benefit%20of%20the%20doubt" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Frico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt%2F&#038;title=RICO%20injury%2C%20federal%20jurisdiction%2C%20and%20giving%20veterans%20the%20benefit%20of%20the%20doubt" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/rico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt/" data-a2a-title="RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt">Share</a></p><p><em>The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available </em><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/faqs-announcements-of-orders-and-opinions/#relists_explained"><em>here</em></a><em>.</em></p>
  295. <p>The Supreme Court is back in the relist business with a vengeance. On Monday, it granted review of the <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/garland-v-vanderstok-2/">Biden administration’s newly relisted petition</a> seeking to establish the lawfulness of its efforts to regulate so-called “ghost guns,” as well as <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/lackey-v-stinnie/">the Commonwealth of Virginia’s first-time relist</a> arguing that a plaintiff who won a preliminary injunction enjoining a state law (but who did not secure a final judgment) may nonetheless be considered a “prevailing party” entitled to attorney’s fees.</p>
  296. <p>The court will be considering 123 petitions and applications at this week’s conference. There are four newly relisted cases among that group that represent the likeliest candidates for the court’s review. <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-6304.html">One of those four</a> involves an issue on which the court already is considering 11 other relisted cases: whether the Sixth and 14th Amendments require the use of a 12-person jury to try defendants accused of felonies, rather than the six-person jury Florida affords for many such offenses.</p>
  297. <p>First up is what I think is the likeliest grant: <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/medical-marijuana-inc-v-horn/"><em>Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn</em></a>. Douglas J. Horn lost his job as a commercial truck driver after a drug test he took reflected the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”), the active chemical compound in marijuana. Horn maintained that he ingested THC unwittingly by consuming a cannabis-derived product that Medical Marijuana, Inc. marketed as THC-free.<span id="more-316169"></span></p>
  298. <p>Horn sued, alleging injury under the <a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/part-i-crimes/chapter-96-racketeer-influenced-and-corrupt-organizations/section-1964-civil-remedies">Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act</a>. The district court held that Horn lacked RICO standing&nbsp;because he sued for economic injuries from loss of earnings that were derived from his personal injury (exposure to THC). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit reversed, holding that although RICO only permits suit by a plaintiff “injured in his business or property” by racketeering activity, an economic injury resulting from personal injury sufficed.</p>
  299. <p>Medical Marijuana, represented by Supreme Court veteran Lisa Blatt, petitions for review, arguing that the courts of appeals “are divided on whether economic damages arising from persual injuries &#8230; support civil RICO liability.” Medical Marijuana notes that the Supreme Court indicated – <a href="https://casetext.com/case/rjr-nabisco-inc-v-european-cmty">a bit offhandedly, in an opinion addressing another issue</a> – that RICO’s private cause of action “exclud[ed], for example, personal injuries.” If granted, it should make for an <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/fifty-time-supreme-court-litigator-keeps-justices-on-their-toes">interesting argument</a>.</p>
  300. <p>You might think that is surely the most colorful relist we get, but this week we have some competition in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/royal-canin-u-s-a-inc-v-wullschleger/"><em>Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger</em></a>. Anastasia Wullschleger’s dog, Clinton, suffered from health problems. So also for Geraldine Brewer’s cat, Sassie. Veterinarians recommended they be fed specialized food available only by prescription. While the prescription food contained different ingredients than regular pet food, it included no medication. Wullschleger and Brewer brought a putative class action in Missouri state court, alleging that the “prescription” designation is misleading because the Food and Drug Administration never evaluated the product, and that they were injured by the food’s higher price. They alleged violation of Missouri’s antitrust and consumer-protection laws, and that defendants had been unjustly enriched, among other things.</p>
  301. <p>Royal Canin and Purina, the pet-food makers, removed the case to federal court, arguing that the antitrust and unjust enrichment claims implicated federal law issues. Wullschleger and Brewer amended the complaint to eliminate all references to federal law and sought to have the case remanded to state court. The district court refused, but <a href="https://casetext.com/case/wullschleger-v-royal-canin-usa-inc-2/">the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit agreed</a> and ordered remand. <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-677/293751/20231219145536847_1%20Wullschleger%20-%20Petition%20for%20Writ%20of%20Certiorari%20PDF%20A.pdf">Royal Canin and Purina now petition</a> for review, arguing that the 8th Circuit “departed from uniform law in all other circuits,” which it says does not permit plaintiffs to amend their way out of federal court back into state court.</p>
  302. <p>Last up is <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bufkin-v-mcdonough/"><em>Bufkin v. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs</em></a>. <a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-38-veterans-benefits/part-iv-general-administrative-provisions/chapter-51-claims-effective-dates-and-payments/subchapter-i-claims/section-5107-claimant-responsibility-benefit-of-the-doubt">Section 5107(b) of Title 38</a> provides that, “[w]hen there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary [of Veterans Affairs] shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant.” Congress later enacted the Veterans Benefits Act, codified in relevant part at <a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-38-veterans-benefits/part-v-boards-administrations-and-services/chapter-72-united-states-court-of-appeals-for-veterans-claims/subchapter-ii-procedure/section-7261-scope-of-review">38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1)</a>, which requires the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the “Veterans Court”) to “take due account of the Secretary’s application of section 5107(b)” as part of its review of benefits appeals.</p>
  303. <p>Veterans Joshua Bufkin and Norman Thornton were each denied benefits despite evidence that appeared to be in “approximate balance.” In reviewing the Veterans Court decision, the <a href="https://casetext.com/case/bufkin-v-mcdonough">U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held</a> that Section 7261(b)(1) “does not require the Veterans Court to conduct any review of the benefit of the doubt issue beyond” performing the usual review of the underlying factual findings for clear error — a basic procedural requirement that was already in place before enactment of the Veterans Benefits Act. Bufkin and Thornton now seek review, arguing that “the Federal Circuit ignored the plain text of the statute and frustrated Congress’s clear intent to provide for enhanced appellate review and enforcement of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule.”</p>
  304. <p>We’ll know more soon. Until next time!</p>
  305. <h3><strong>New Relists</strong></h3>
  306. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/medical-marijuana-inc-v-horn/"><em>Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn</em></a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-365.html">23-365</a><br />
  307. <strong>Issue</strong>: Whether economic harms resulting from personal injuries are injuries to “business or property by reason of” the defendant’s acts for purposes of a civil treble-damages action under the&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/part-i-crimes/chapter-96-racketeer-influenced-and-corrupt-organizations/section-1964-civil-remedies">Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act</a>.<br />
  308. (relisted after the Apr. 19 conference)</p>
  309. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/royal-canin-u-s-a-inc-v-wullschleger/"><em>Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger</em></a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-677.html">23-677</a><br />
  310. <strong>Issues</strong>: (1) Whether a post-removal amendment of a complaint to omit federal questions defeats federal-question subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-28-judiciary-and-judicial-procedure/part-iv-jurisdiction-and-venue/chapter-85-district-courts-jurisdiction/section-1331-federal-question">28 U.S.C. § 1331</a>; and (2) whether such a post-removal amendment of a complaint precludes a district court from exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s remaining state-law claims pursuant to&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-28-judiciary-and-judicial-procedure/part-iv-jurisdiction-and-venue/chapter-85-district-courts-jurisdiction/section-1367-supplemental-jurisdiction">28 U.S.C. § 1367</a>.<br />
  311. (relisted after the Apr. 19 conference)<em>&nbsp;</em></p>
  312. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bufkin-v-mcdonough/"><em>Bufkin v. McDonough, Secretary of Veteran’s Affairs</em></a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-713.html">23-713</a><br />
  313. <strong>Issue:</strong> Whether the Veterans Court must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1), which directs the Veterans Court to “take due account” of VA’s application of that rule.<br />
  314. (relisted after the Apr. 19 conference)</p>
  315. <p><em>Onterrious v. Tillman</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-6304.html">23-6304</a><br />
  316. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to a trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony.<br />
  317. (relisted after the Apr. 19 conference)</p>
  318. <h3><strong>Returning Relists</strong></h3>
  319. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/hamm-v-smith-3/"><em>Hamm v. Smith</em></a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-167.html">23-167</a><em>&nbsp;</em><br />
  320. <strong>Issues</strong>: (1) Whether&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/case/hall-v-florida-7"><em>Hall v. Florida</em></a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/case/moore-v-texas-12"><em>Moore v. Texas</em></a>&nbsp;mandate that courts deem the standard of “significantly subaverage intellectual functioning” for determining intellectual disability in&nbsp;<a href="https://casetext.com/case/atkins-v-virginia-3"><em>Atkins v. Virginia</em></a>&nbsp;satisfied when an offender’s lowest IQ score, decreased by one standard error of measurement, is 70 or below; and (2) whether the court should overrule&nbsp;<em>Hall</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>Moore</em>, or at least clarify that they permit courts to consider multiple IQ scores and the probability that an offender’s IQ does not fall at the bottom of the lowest IQ score’s error range.<br />
  321. (relisted after the Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22, Mar. 28, Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  322. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/sandoval-v-texas/"><em>Sandoval v. Texas</em></a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5618.html">23-5618</a><br />
  323. <strong>Issues</strong>: (1) How courts should determine when jury empanelment begins for a particular defendant’s case, triggering the due process right to be present, given that jury selection is one of the most critical phases of a criminal trial; and (2) whether the state court erred when it held, without analysis of the underlying facts, that the trial court did not violate Gustavo Sandoval’s due process rights when it excluded him and his counsel from proceedings in which members of the jury panel who were called for his trial — and who knew the case that they were summoned for — sought discretionary excusals from the court.<br />
  324. (relisted after the Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22, Mar. 28, Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)<strong>&nbsp;</strong></p>
  325. <p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bouarfa-v-mayorkas/"><em>Bouarfa v. Mayorkas</em></a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-583.html">23-583</a><br />
  326. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether a visa petitioner may obtain judicial review when an approved petition is revoked on the basis of nondiscretionary criteria.<br />
  327. (relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  328. <p><em>Cunningham v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5171.html">23-5171</a><br />
  329. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  330. (rescheduled before the Nov. 17, Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  331. <p><em>Guzman v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5173.html">23-5173</a><br />
  332. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  333. (rescheduled before the Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  334. <p><em>Crane v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5455.html">23-5455</a><br />
  335. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  336. (rescheduled before the Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  337. <p><em>Arellano-Ramirez v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5567.html">23-5567</a><br />
  338. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  339. (rescheduled before the Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  340. <p><em>Jackson v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5570.html">23-5570</a><br />
  341. <strong>Issue:</strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  342. (rescheduled before the Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  343. <p><em>Sposato v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5575.html">23-5575</a><br />
  344. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  345. (rescheduled before the Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  346. <p><em>Morton v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5579.html">23-5579</a><br />
  347. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony<br />
  348. (rescheduled before the Dec. 1, Dec. 8, Jan. 5, Jan. 12, Jan. 19, Feb. 16, Feb. 23, Mar. 1, Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  349. <p><em>Aiken v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5794.html">23-5794</a><br />
  350. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to a trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony.<br />
  351. (rescheduled before the Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  352. <p><em>Enrriquez v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5965.html">23-5965</a><br />
  353. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to a trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony.<br />
  354. (rescheduled before the Mar. 15, Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  355. <p><em>Bartee v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-6143.html">23-6143</a><br />
  356. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to a trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony.<br />
  357. (relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  358. <p><em>Manning v. Florida</em>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-6049.html">23-6049</a><br />
  359. <strong>Issue: </strong>Whether the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to a trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a felony.<br />
  360. (rescheduled before the Mar. 22 and Mar 28 conferences; relisted after the Apr. 12 and Apr. 19 conferences)</p>
  361. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/rico-injury-federal-jurisdiction-and-giving-veterans-the-benefit-of-the-doubt/">RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  362. ]]></content:encoded>
  366. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/cameras-banner-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  367. </item>
  368. <item>
  369. <title>The morning read for Friday, April 26</title>
  370. <link>https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-friday-april-26/</link>
  372. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellena Erskine]]></dc:creator>
  373. <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
  374. <category><![CDATA[Round-up]]></category>
  375. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.scotusblog.com/?p=316167</guid>
  376.  
  377. <description><![CDATA[<p><img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Friday, April 26" title="The morning read for Friday, April 26" style="float:right;" decoding="async" />Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read: Supreme Court seems skeptical of Trump’s claim of absolute immunity but decision’s timing is unclear (Mark Sherman, The Associated Press)...</p>
  378. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-friday-april-26/">The morning read for Friday, April 26</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  379. ]]></description>
  380. <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img width="150" height="150" src="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="The morning read for Friday, April 26" title="The morning read for Friday, April 26" style="float:right;" decoding="async" /><p><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-april-26%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20April%2026" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_linkedin" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-april-26%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20April%2026" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-april-26%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20April%2026" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_email" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/email?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-april-26%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20April%2026" title="Email" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_printfriendly" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/printfriendly?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-april-26%2F&amp;linkname=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20April%2026" title="PrintFriendly" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_no_icon addtoany_share_save addtoany_share" href="https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2F2024%2F04%2Fthe-morning-read-for-friday-april-26%2F&#038;title=The%20morning%20read%20for%20Friday%2C%20April%2026" data-a2a-url="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-friday-april-26/" data-a2a-title="The morning read for Friday, April 26">Share</a></p><p>Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read:</p>
  381. <ul>
  382. <li><a href="https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-trump-capitol-riot-prosecution-immunity-72c885c07c77970d4380206f87b2d8ca">Supreme Court seems skeptical of Trump’s claim of absolute immunity but decision’s timing is unclear</a> (Mark Sherman, The Associated Press)</li>
  383. <li><a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-weighs-trumps-bid-immunity-prosecution-2024-04-25/">US Supreme Court justices in Trump case lean toward some level of immunity</a> (John Kruzel &amp; Andrew Chung, Reuters)</li>
  384. <li><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/04/25/supreme-court-oral-arguments-trump-immunity/">Supreme Court seems poised to allow Trump Jan. 6 trial, but not immediately</a> (Ann E. Marimow, The Washington Post)</li>
  385. <li><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/26/politics/trump-immunity-supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts/index.html">John Roberts isn’t happy with previous ruling against Trump – what happens now?</a> (Joan Biskupic, CNN)</li>
  386. <li><a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1247383537/trumps-immunity-arguments-supreme-court-conservatives">Trump&#8217;s immunity arguments and the experiences of the justices who might support it</a> (Nina Totenberg, NPR)</li>
  387. </ul>
  388. <p class="p1">&nbsp;</p>
  389. <p>The post <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/the-morning-read-for-friday-april-26/">The morning read for Friday, April 26</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com">SCOTUSblog</a>.</p>
  390. ]]></content:encoded>
  394. <post-thumbnail><url>https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Banner201130-150x150.jpg</url><width>150</width><height>150</height></post-thumbnail>
  395. </item>
  396. </channel>
  397. </rss>
  398.  

Home · About · News · Docs · Terms

 
Copyright © 2002-9 Sam Ruby, Mark Pilgrim, Joseph Walton, and Phil Ringnalda