Thread by @chrisgeidner

Off to SnowTUS. (I’m sorry.) #SCOTUS

The actual #SCOTUS, Feb. 20, 2019.

Despite the federal snow day in DC, SCOTUS is open. We have the possibility of one or more opinions in argued cases at 10a, followed by arguments in a bankruptcy law case. Background at @SCOTUSblog: scotusblog.com/case-files/cas…

It's a one-box day, meaning one or two opinions. Coming shortly. #SCOTUS

The first decision is in Dawson v. Steager, and it is a unanimous decision by Gorsuch reversing the lower court. #SCOTUS

The second decision is in Timbs v. Indiana. The decision is by Ginsburg, who is reading her decision from the bench. The court ruled that the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause is incorporated — meaning applied against the states. No justices dissented.

Here is the decision in Dawson: supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf…

Here is the decision in Timbs: supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf…

In Timbs — a major question before the justices — Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion and Thomas concurred in judgment only.

Ginsburg just finished reading from her opinion.

The majority in Timbs held that the due process guarantees of the 14th Amendment compelled the incorporation of the Excessive Fines Clause.

Thomas says the "privileges and immunities" clause of the 14th Amendment should be used to apply the provision to the states.

Gorsuch says "there can be no serious doubt" that the Excessive Fines Clause should be applied to the states, but he says the vehicle to do so "may well be" the "privileges and immunities" clause, rather than the "due process" clause.

Going upstairs for arguments. Back later.

For those keeping watch from home:
-Justice Ginsburg asked multiple questions in today’s “what happens to a trademark license in bankruptcy” case.
-Justice Breyer talked about air-conditioned igloos, promoting Justices Alito, Kagan, Kavanaugh to look at one another and chuckle.

The looks and chuckles won’t be reflected in the transcript and almost certainly won’t be able to be heard at all — let alone be able to be known from whom they came — on the audio. Nothing comes close to seeing arguments in person to understand what’s actually happening.

The Supreme Court would do a great service to itself, to journalism, and to the American people to allow the public to see the arguments more easily. The 9th Circuit has had live-streamed arguments for years, with no problems. The upsides are plenty, and downsides are few.

No, it’s not likely to happen any time soon. This past summer, a bunch of us Supreme Court journalists asked the court to release the ~audio~ of the opinion announcement in the travel ban case earlier than it normally would be released (that fall). The court denied our request.

You can, however, now listen to the opinion announcement audio at least here, FYI: oyez.org/cases/2017/17-…

Anyway, that’s all from today’s snowy #SCOTUS. 🏛

Here's my write-up of today's big #SCOTUS incorporation decision in Timbs v. Indiana: buzzfeednews.com/article/chrisg…