Opinions in one or more of the 15 remaining #SCOTUS cases from this term expected at 10a. We don't know which cases or how many will be decided, but those left include voting rights, financial disclosure, student speech rights, college athletes, and more.
First opinion is in Goldman Sachs v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System. Barrett has the opinion for the court in the class-action case, vacating and remanding the 2nd Circuit. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Interesting vote divergence here, with Sotomayor dissenting in part as to the judgment and Gorsuch (joined by Thomas and Alito) dissenting in part as to the burden of persuasion. So, Barrett's full opinion was only for 5 justices (her, Roberts, Breyer, Kagan, and Kavanaugh.
Breaking: #SCOTUS unanimously rules that NCAA rules barring student athlete education-related benefits violate federal antitrust laws. Goruch writes the opinion. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
From Gorsuch's conclusion:
Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion, although he also joined Gorsuch's opinion, to basically write that he is ready to take on the other NCAA compensation rules not at issue in this appeal.
Today's final #SCOTUS decision is in US v. Arthrex. Roberts has the Court's 5-4 opinion, finding that Administrative Patent Judges' authority under their appointment method is unconstitutional. [Clarified.] Thomas joins the 3 liberals in dissent. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
From Thomas's dissent:
The Court's remedy is that the director can review the APJ decisions. Breyer — joined by Sotomayor and Kagan — agrees with Thomas on the merits but joins Roberts' opinion as to the remedy (in order to create a majority for the remedy, b/c Gorsuch declined to join that). Roberts:
Here's Gorsuch, dissenting as to the remedy:
Thomas also dissents as to the remedy, meaning that we have a 5-4 decision on the merits (Thomas, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, dissenting) and a 7-2 decision on the remedy (Gorsuch and Thomas, dissenting).
That's it from #SCOTUS today. With 12 decisions remaining — including voting rights, financial disclosure, student speech rights, and more — the next decision day is Wednesday.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Breaking: Booksellers' challenge to Texas's book-ban regime succeeds at the Fifth Circuit.
Today, the full Fifth Circuit announced that the far-right judges of the court LOST a vote for rehearing en banc 8-9 after a 3-judge panel had previously upheld the dist ct's injunction.
There is highly questionable action from the Fifth Circuit this weekend, flagged to me by @steve_vladeck. On Saturday, the Fifth Circuit issued "a temporary administrative stay," allowing Texas S.B. 4 — the challenged Texas immigration law — to go into effect in 7 days.
Here's my thread on the preliminary injunction ruling from Feb. 29:
BREAKING: Fifth Circuit holds that fed'l emergency room protections (EMTALA) do not mandate that physicians provide abortions when that is the "stabilizing treatment" needed, upholding an injunction issued in a lawsuit brought by Texas. More to come: lawdork.com
For background on this issue (while I'm reading and writing), here's some a post relating to the still-pending SCOTUS stay application filed by Idaho in the inverse EMTALA litigation, where DOJ sued Idaho: lawdork.com/i/139439910/th…
BREAKING: Supreme Court will NOT hear case over Washington's conversion therapy ban, over the objection of Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh. Thomas and Alito write.
Supreme Court also DENIES RFK Jr.'s request to intervene at SCOTUS in Murphy v. Missouri, the case over Biden administration social media influence out of the Fifth Circuit. Thomas notes his dissent.
BREAKING: On a 2-1 vote, the 11th Circuit DENIES Florida’s request that it be allowed to enforce its anti-drag law against everyone in the state except the plaintiffs during the appeal.
Jordan and Rosenbaum, both Obama appointees, hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting an injunction prohibiting all enforcement of the ban, given its underlying finding that the law is likely overbroad and this likely facially unconstitutional.
Brasher, a Trump appointee, dissents and would grant a partial stay, finding the injunction to be, itself, overly broad to achieving the goal of protecting the plaintiff’s rights.