Marshall Geisser Law | Thursday round-up
21245
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-21245,single-format-standard,qode-quick-links-1.0,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-11.2,qode-theme-bridge,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-5.2.1,vc_responsive
 

Thursday round-up

Thursday round-up

Thursday round-up

At The Federalist, Margot Cleveland keeps in mind that although the justices rejected cert today in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, which asks whether federal law forbids work discrimination based upon sexual preference, “[t] he Supreme Court … will have to ultimately deal with the circuit split and it’s most likely to have that chance quickly.” Lisa Keen talks about the cert rejection in Evans at Keen News Service.

In 2 posts at the Election Law Blog Site, Nicholas Stephanopolous discuss the term’s 2 partisan gerrymandering cases, Gill v. Whitford, a Democratic obstacle to Wisconsin’s statewide electoral maps, and Benisek v. Lamone, a difficulty by Republican citizens to a single congressional district in Maryland. Stephanopolous keeps here that “had the complainants [in Benisek] assaulted Maryland’s whole congressional map, they (most likely) would have been entitled to dominate under the test embraced by the Whitford high court.” Here, he elaborates on the mergings and divergences in between the complainants’ techniques in the 2 cases.
Quickly:

  • At Powerline, Jim Hinderaker prompts the court to” start the procedure of controling the out of control federal administration” by evaluating and reversing a lower-court choice that “supported Fish and Wildlife’s classification of uninhabitable, privately-owned land as ‘vital environment’ for the dusky gopher frog.”
  • At The Daily Caller, Kevin Daley discusses why “Doug Jones’ triumph in Tuesday’s unique Senate election in Alabama might alter Justice Anthony Kennedy’s calculus as he mulls retirement.”
  • The editorial board of The Washington Post weighs in on Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, where the court will choose whether the First Change bars Colorado from needing a baker to develop a cake for a same-sex wedding event, arguing that “politeness and tolerance are social worths, illegal concepts,” and “[t] hi are not needs to reverse anti-discrimination law.”

We depend on our readers to send us links for our round-up. If you have or understand of a current (released in the last 2 or 3 days) short article, post, podcast, or op-ed associating with the Supreme Court that you ‘d like us to think about for addition in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!

The post Thursday round-up appeared initially on SCOTUSblog.

No Comments

Post A Comment