Round-Up

In today’s Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin has this front page article (subscription req’d) on the shift toward limited access and judicial restraint; Linda Greenhouse had this in-depth piece discussing key rulings, reviewing the Term and describing “the Supreme Court that conservatives had long yearned for and that liberals feared” in yesterday’s New York Times; Marty Lederman responds to her article (and notes a few exceptions) here at Balkinization. On Saturday, the Wall Street Journal ran this op-ed (subscription req’d) discussing the Court’s “incrementalism” and reviewing the Term; in Sunday’s Washington Post, Edward Lazarus had this op-ed discussing the Roberts Court and “shell-shocked” progressives and Robert Barnes had this analysis of the Court’s “steady and well-documented turn to the right.”

David G. Savage had this story on the “confident conservative majority” that “may signal a generational shift in power” in yesterday’s LA Times. The LA Times also had this op-ed declaring that “this term, the winds too often blew in the wrong direction.” On NPR’s Weekend Edition, commentator Mimi Wesson discussed the rulings that exhibited bitterly divided Court with Liane Hansen here and Nina Totenberg and Scott Simon had this audio segment on last week’s decisions and the High Court’s shift in direction. Professor Jonathan Adler and Professor Goodwin Liu evaluate and discuss the Term (transcript here; video here) with Margaret Warner on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer; and Professor Douglas Kmiec has this commentary (subscription req’d) on the Term in the Legal Times.

Also in Sunday’s New York Times, William Yardley had this report on how Seattle schools are reacting to last week’s ruling; and Professor Jeffrey Rosen commented on the school assignment decision and its relationship to Brown here in the Week in Review. At Slate, Risa Goluboff weighs in here on the Court’s decision in the school cases, which “represents the culmination of a 50-year-old debate about the meaning and content of Brown v. Board of Education“; and Mark Graber has these thoughts on “the constitutionalization of … Strom Thurmond’s Brown v. Board of Education” at Balkinization. Professor Pamela Karlan has this post discussing the school integration decision, its similarities to Carhart II and Justice Kennedy’s concurrence at the ACSBlog; FindLaw columnist Michael C. Dorf weighs in here on the opinions, the issues, and the impact of the ruling; Abigail Thernstrom of the Wall Street Journal has this commentary (subscription req’d) on the Seattle and Louisville school cases stating that “in a 5-4 opinion last Thursday, the court took a gratifying but sadly limited step in the right direction”; and guest blogger Deborah Hellman discusses Chief Justice Roberts’s plurality opinion here at Balkinization.

Over the weekend, the Wall Street Journal’s Nick Timiraos had this article (subscription req’d) providing a closer look at the business cases decided by the Court this term; Washington Post Business Columnist Steven Pealrstein weighs in here on the High Court’s “string of rulings that generally favored businesses over consumers, employees, plaintiffs and investors”; and Tony Mauro of the Legal Times reports here that “the Roberts Court, and especially its newest member, Samuel Alito Jr., are both very conservative and very pro-business.”

Last Friday, SCOTUSblog’s own Lyle Denniston had this segment on WBUR’s “Here & Now” discussing the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the Guantanamo detainee appeals, a reversal in course.

Georgetown University Law Center’s Supreme Court Institute published this overview of the Term. The National Academy of Education recently released this report, entitled “Race-Conscious Policies for Assigning Students to Schools: Social Science Research and the Supreme Court Cases.”

Former Governor John Engler weighs in here on the import of Stoneridge v. Scientific-Atlanta in today’s Washington Post; and this editorial in today’s LA Times discusses the Leegin decision, “whose frivolous subject matter concealed some important implications for U.S. business.”

At PrawfsBlawg, Professor Kristin Hickman has this post on the administrative law issues underlying Riegel v. Medtronic. Lastly, Rick Hasen of Election Law Blog notes here that a cert. petition has been filed in the Indiana voter ID case.