- At Bloomberg Law, Jordan Rubin reports that “[a] Maryland murder case that garnered nationwide attention after a hit podcast raised questions about its subject’s guilt landed on Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court.”
- Ariane de Vogue reports at CNN that “[t]he Trump administration reiterated to the Supreme Court on Friday that it does not believe that federal employment law that bans discrimination based on sex also encompasses discrimination based on transgender status … in the latest filing in one of the most important cases of the upcoming Supreme Court term,” G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of respondent Stephens in this case.]
- At Take Care, Leah Litman and Kyle Skinner note that “[t]he Solicitor General recently filed a petition for certiorari asking the Supreme Court to review a constitutional challenge to the so-called expedited removal system,” in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam; they argue that “[t]he Court should deny the petition, for no other reason than that the Trump administration –within the last month–announced that it is dramatically expanding, and therefore radically altering, the scope of the expedited removal system.”
- At the Yale Journal on Regulation’s Notice & Comment blog, Bernard Bell writes that although Kansas v. Garcia, which asks whether a federal immigration-law provision pre-empts a state prosecution for identity theft for using someone else’s Social Security number, “may appear to be an immigration case, … lurking near the surface is a dispute over preemption analysis, namely the role of textualism and the scope of the presumption against preemption,” which “may have implications far beyond the immigration context.”
- At Truthdig, Bill Blum worries that New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York, a challenge to New York City’s limits on transporting personal firearms, “has the potential to rival or surpass [District of Columbia v. Heller] for its impact on gun rights and gun regulation.”
We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!