So holds Mussa v. Palmer-Mussa (N.C. Aug. 24, 2012), reversing a lower court decision that I had blogged about. Juma Mussa claimed that he wasn’t actually married to Nikki Palmer-Mussa, because (1) some years before their marriage she had married Khalil Braswell in a religious ceremony, (2) the ceremony created a legal civil marriage — […]
Archive | September, 2012
Sackett v. EPA and the Due Process Deficit in Environmental Law
Last term, in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, a unanimous Supreme Court rejected the EPA’s effort to deny private landowners an opportunity to challenge the agency’s assertion of jurisdiction over their land. The Sacketts wanted to build a home in a subdivision, but the EPA concluded the Sacketts’ land to contain jurisdictional wetlands under the […]
Upcoming Talks
Tomorrow I’ll be moderating a panel on “The President’s Power to Implement International Law after Medellin v. Texas” at a conference on Presidential Power, Foreign Affairs and the 2012 Election at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law. The conference will be webcast and speakers include Jack Goldsmith, Amos Guiora, Leila Sadat, Gregory Noone, […]
Fisher v. Texas and the Future of Affirmative Action
By David Bernstein on September 6, 2012 9:39 pm in Affirmative Action, Fisher v. University of Texas
My contribution to Scotusblog’s symposium on Fisher v. Texas can be found here. An excerpt follows. Public debate over affirmative action revolves almost entirely around the issue of preferences for African Americans. This is not surprising, given that affirmative action was initiated in the 1960s to serve the “compensatory justice” rationale of redressing historical oppression […]
District Court Rules that the Wiretap Act Does Not Prohibit Intercepting Unencrypted Wireless Communications
The decision is In re INNOVATIO IP VENTURES, LLC PATENT LITIGATION. MDL Docket No. 2303, Case No. 11 C 9308. (N.D.Ill. August 22, 2012), via Cybercrime Review. The opinion holds that anyone can monitor the unencrypted wi-fi communications of anyone else without implicating the Wiretap Act. I think the decision is wrong, and I wanted […]
More on the judicial smackdown: You’re the one who engaged in misconduct!
District Judge Robert Jones, who enjoined Nevada’s “None of These Candidates” as likely unconstitutional (see my post from a few hours ago), responded to the 9th Circuit’s order and Justice Reinhardt’s concurrence in particular here. I agree with the commenters that he was probably better off remaining silent, since he does not justify his delays in dealing […]
Speaking at Notre Dame Law School
By Dale Carpenter on September 6, 2012 4:36 pm in Gay Marriage, Religion and the Law, Same-Sex Marriage
On Monday, September 10, during the lunch hour, I’ll be presenting “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage” at the Notre Dame Federalist Society. Professor John Finnis will respond.
New Pro Bono Cert Petition — Butt v. Utah
My sense is that our readers like to hear about our actual lawyering — rare as it is — so I thought I’d mention a new pro bono cert petition I just filed today, in Butt v. Utah [UPDATE: corrected upload glitch, petition is now readable]. The petition seeks review of the Utah Supreme Court […]
More on the “Tradeoffs” in Allowing SSM and Abolishing Slavery
Commenting on University of St. Thomas law professor Robert Delahunty’s recent op-ed, my colleague Richard Painter shares some thoughts on the subject of limiting the freedom of some people so that others may live in a world unstained by that particular freedom: Let’s put aside for the moment the fact that I don’t see such a tradeoff with abolition of slavery because […]
“His dilatory tactics appear to serve no purpose other than to seek to prevent the state from taking an appeal of his decision before it must print the ballots.”
I am finally returning to blogging a bit. From the “judicial smackdown” files: A week ago, a district judge agreed with arguments that Nevada’s 36-year-old statute requiring a “None of These Candidates” option on the ballot for statewide elections is likely unconstitutional and issued an oral preliminary injunction. That’s pretty remarkable – on what basis […]
“Supreme Court’s New Agent Already Getting Them Better Cases”
The Onion has a story that begins: WASHINGTON—The justices of the United States Supreme Court confirmed this week that although he has been on the job less than a year, their new agent, Rory McCleft, has already started to help the nine-member panel land more high-profile cases. Early in its 2011–2012 term, the nation’s highest […]
Two District Court Rulings That Cell-Site Data Not Protected Under the Fourth Amendment
On Tuesday, DOJ filed a brief in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in United States v. Antoine Jones, on remand from the Supreme Court, on the question of whether cell-site location information is protected under the Fourth Amendment. It’s a good brief, I think, and I was particularly intrigued by […]
Bill of Health — a New Health Law Policy, Biotech, and Bioethics Blog, from the Harvard Law School’s Petrie-Flom Center
The blog is here, and it looks very interesting. Its contributors include, among many others, Richard Epstein (formerly of University of Chicago Law School, now at NYU Law), Einer Elhauge (Harvard Law), and our own Russell Korobkin.
The Takings Clause and Government Destruction of Homeless Persons’ Property
Co-blogger Orin Kerr comments on the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision holding that a Los Angeles policy allowing the seizure of briefly unattended property belonging to the homeless violates the Fourth Amendment’s ban on “unreasonable” seizures. It’s worth noting that the policy also violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which requires government to pay […]
Affirmative Action, Transparency, and Fisher v. Texas
Affirmative action isn’t exactly an issue that brings people together across ideological lines. It’s a divider, not a uniter. But there is considerable cross-ideological agreement on one point: if we are going to have racial preferences for minorities, it’s better to be transparent about it. In the recent SCOTUSblog symposium on the upcoming Fisher v. […]