• Who is Neil Gorsuch? U.S. Supreme Court Justice | NowThis
    Articles,  Blog

    Who is Neil Gorsuch? U.S. Supreme Court Justice | NowThis

    Senator, those are not my words and I would never had said them. I didn’t say that. I asked you if you agreed with this statement. And I’m telling you I don’t. That’s Neil Gorsuch. He was appointed by President Trump to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant after the death of Antonin Scalia. Scalia died during President Obama’s term, but Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland was stonewalled by Republicans until a Conservative got into office… They have ripped us to shreds. Ripped us absolutely to shreds. Actually, I was only kidding, you can get the baby out of here. Now it’s paying off. Gorsuch will affect decades of…

  • Articles

    Heffernan v. City of Paterson: Oral Argument – January 19, 2016

    Roberts: We’ll hear argument first this morning in Case 14-1280, Heffernan v. City of Paterson, New Jersey. Mr. Frost. Frost: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court: Public employees have a right not to be demoted on patronage grounds. It does not matter if you are affiliated with a specific party or that you are nonaffiliated. It does not matter if you are mistakenly perceived by your employer or supervisor that you’re engaged in political association to be protected by the First Amendment. Kennedy: How would you define the right at issue in this case? Frost: The — the issue here is — Kennedy: How would you define…

  • Supreme Court Roundup: October Term 2017 [SCOTUSbrief]
    Articles,  Blog

    Supreme Court Roundup: October Term 2017 [SCOTUSbrief]

    The case of Sveen v. Melin is a case about the contracts clause of the Constitution. Contracts clause says that no state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts. And at issue is a 2002 Minnesota law that said that in the event of a divorce, the designation of an ex-spouse as a beneficiary will be revoked automatically. Kaye Melin and Mark Sveen were married in 1997. They get divorced in 2007. When Mr. Sveen died, the primary beneficiary on his life insurance policy was his ex-wife, Kaye Melin, and the contingent beneficiaries were his two children from a prior marriage. So the question is, is Kaye Melin…

  • Supreme Court Roundup: October Term 2018 [SCOTUSbrief]
    Articles,  Blog

    Supreme Court Roundup: October Term 2018 [SCOTUSbrief]

    This was an interesting term. Not as many blockbusters, necessarily, as-as in past years, but plenty to chew on, and there are individual videos about the-the biggest cases. I want to talk about three others that might get overlooked. Knick was the biggest property rights case of the term, probably the biggest property rights case in some time. Even though it was a procedural case, that is, it was about whether you have to first go to state court to bring your claim that the local government has taken your property in violation of the Fifth Amendment, or whether you can go straight to federal court. Rose Mary Knick said…

  • O’Bannon v. NCAA: Intellectual Property, Antitrust, & College Sports [POLICYbrief]
    Articles,  Blog

    O’Bannon v. NCAA: Intellectual Property, Antitrust, & College Sports [POLICYbrief]

    I was, uh, at a friend’s house and saw my likeness on a video game that his kid was playing. I initially thought it was pretty cool and was flattered, quite honestly. But then it was brought to my attention that they had paid for that video game and I didn’t get any type of compensation or even, uh, permission to use my likeness on that video game. It was his height, his race, his skillset, his jersey number, everything but his name. He raised this question of how is it possible that years and years and years after I, I played that the NCAA can continue to earn revenue…

  • NIFLA v. Becerra: Can a State Regulate Professional Speech? [SCOTUSbrief]
    Articles,  Blog

    NIFLA v. Becerra: Can a State Regulate Professional Speech? [SCOTUSbrief]

    The petitioners in this case are pro-life pregnancy centers, and the respondents are state officials of the state of California. Legally an issue in this case is the ability of the state to regulate professional speech or conduct and whether or not they may essentially compel a message that is contrary to the beliefs of the speakers. In 2015, California enacted the Reproductive FACT Act. The FACT Act imposes two disclosure requirements on pregnancy centers in California. Crisis pregnancy centers are organized with the purpose of giving aid to pregnant mothers in the hopes that they will choose life for their unborn child. Some of the crisis pregnancy centers are…

  • Chevron: Accidental Landmark
    Articles,  Blog

    Chevron: Accidental Landmark

    Preserve, protect, and defend. Preserve, protect, and defend. The Constitution of the United States. The Constitution of the United States. So help you God. So help me God. May I congratulate you, sir. Chevron was decided in 1984, which was kind of midway into the Reagan administration. The Reagan administration, um, came into office with a, uh, very strong focus on deregulation of, uh, um, the economy. Reagan comes in, you got a Democratic Senate, but he wins by a pretty healthy margin. This is one of his four platforms. The incoming Reagan administration reversed some regulations that governed basically application of, uh, air pollution requirements under the Clean Air…

  • New York Times Co. v. Sullivan: A Landmark Case for Free Speech [No. 86]
    Articles,  Blog

    New York Times Co. v. Sullivan: A Landmark Case for Free Speech [No. 86]

    The Framers, I think mentioned the freedom of the press in the first amendment, because they recognized that freedom of mass communication is a very important check, perhaps the most important check on government power. And that’s especially so in a democracy. In a democracy, the people govern, but the people have to be aware of what is happening, and the only way that they can learn what’s going on, they can hear the arguments about what’s going on, is if printing presses, and now their technological heirs, are free of government censorship. Political advertising is, generally speaking, fully protected by the first amendment, subject only to narrow exception for…

  • John Marshall: The Man Who Made the Supreme Court [POLICYbrief]
    Articles,  Blog

    John Marshall: The Man Who Made the Supreme Court [POLICYbrief]

    John Marshall was the fourth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He came onto a court which lacked energy, weight, and dignity. Those are the words of the first Chief Justice, John Jay. But after Marshall was Chief Justice for 34 years, no one would ever say that again. America needed a judicial armature to support it. It needed legal rulings in favor of the binding power of contracts and in favor of a national market, and those were supplied by the Marshall Court. Marshall changed the court in a number of ways. I think the first was his geniality. Marshall liked people and people liked him, and this helped…

  • Supreme Court Preview: What Is in Store for October Term 2017?
    Articles,  Blog

    Supreme Court Preview: What Is in Store for October Term 2017?

    My name is Jan Crawford and I’m a correspondent with CBS News. I cover the Supreme Court and it is my great honor, uh, to be here to quote-unquote moderate this event, which we’re saying earlier, I have the easiest job you can imagine. I’m gonna introduce these incredible legal experts, and they’re going to discuss, uh, what is shaping up to be a pretty remarkable term. I was thinking, you know, having, see I started covering the court in 1994. So, I’ve gone to a lot of these Supreme Court, uh, preview sessions, as I know, a lot of my colleagues, we can kind of empathize about this. There…