Friday round-up

Thursdays coverage of the Court focused on some of the high-profile cases argued recently at the Court, as well as some of the cases that will be argued later this Term.

Last weeks arguments inHollingsworth v. PerryandUnited States v. Windsor, the challenges to Californias Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (respectively), continued to garner coverage. AtBloomberg Businessweek, Charlie Rose speaks with David Boies, who with Ted Olson serves as counsel for the respondents inPerry, about the case. Boies describes his involvement in the case as well as his perspective on the cases importance for civil rights more broadly, noting that [i]n many ways, [Perry] is the most important case Ive ever been involved in. AtACSblog, Holning Lau considers the potential effect of Perry and Windsor in states, like North Carolina, that have amended their constitutions to prohibit same-sex marriage. Lau contends that, although a victory in California will eventually have spillover effects that reach North Carolina, the cases are unlikely to have any immediate legal impact on same-sex couples in the state or other similarly situated states. And Ilya Somin, writing at theVolokh Conspiracy, responds to Linda GreenhousesOpinionatorcolumn in yesterdays issue of The New York Times, which Cormac covered inyesterdays round-up. Somin criticizes Greenhouses characterization of the federalism argument against DOMA, asserting that it is perfectly possible for a particular law to be both beyond the scope of Congress authority if enacted by the federal governmentanda violation of constitutional individual rights if adopted by a state. [Disclosures: Tejinder Singh of the law firm Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel on an amicus brief filed by international human rights advocates in support of the respondents in Perry. And Kevin Russell of the law firm Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel on anamicus brief filed by former senators in support of Edith Windsor.]

In other news about currently pending cases, Terry Frieden of CNNand Pete Yost of theAssociated Pressboth cover remarks by Attorney General Eric Holder yesterday regarding the Voting Rights Act andShelby County v. Holder, the pending challenge to Section 5 of the Act. In his remarks before the National Action Network, Holder noted that the Department of Justice would remain committed to the aggressive and appropriate enforcement of all voting and civil rights protections, including every part of the Voting Rights Act, while it awaited the Courts ruling inShelby County. [Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to Representative F. James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed anamicusbrief in support of the respondent in this case.]

Other coverage of the Court looked ahead to amicus briefs recently filed at the Court. AtCato@Liberty, Trevor Burrusdiscusses the brief filed by the Cato Institute inUnited States v. Kebodeaux, in which the Court will consider whether Congress possesses the Article I authority to provide for criminal penalties for the failure to register as a sex offender under the relevant provision of federal law, as applied to a person who was convicted of a sex offense under federal law but completed his criminal sentence before the enactment of the registration provision. At theVolokh Conspiracy, Eugene Volokh highlights the amicus brief that he filed on behalf of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and the Christian Legal Society inAgency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, in which the Court will consider whether a law requiring an organization to maintain a policy explicitly opposing prostitution in order to receive federal funding to provide HIV and AIDS programs overseas is a violation of the First Amendment. Volokh also discusses amicus briefs recently filed in support of certiorari in Scott v. Saint Johns Church in the Wilderness, in which the parties urge the Court to consider the constitutionality of an injunction prohibiting the display of gruesome images of aborted fetuses outside a church. Volokh separately highlights the briefs filed by theCenter for Bio-Ethical Research,Historians of Art and Photography,Scholars of the Religion Clauses, andConstitutional Law Professors.

Briefly:

• In an academic highlight forthis blog, Ronald Collins discusses a forthcoming article by Lee Levine and Stephen Wermiel about First Amendment law,The Landmark that Wasnt: A First Amendment Play in Five Acts.
• Also atthis blog, Adam Chandler repeats his previous study of certiorari-stage amicus activity, culling a number of interesting findings from the data and reports (among other things) that such activity has heated up substantially over the past five years.
• In a letter to the editor of TheWashington Post, Tony Mauro argues that the Courts resistance to camera access disserves the public and the court itself.
• Writing at ThinkProgress, Nicole Flatow reports that last weeks decision in Comcast v. Behrend, in which the Court held that the plaintiff class of Comcast subscribers was improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(3), as the classs proposed damages model could not show damages on a class-wide basis, is already having major repercussions in several other cases alleging malfeasance by major corporations. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the respondents in this case.]
• Daniel A. Himebaugh atCapital Pressconsiders the Courts recent opinion inDecker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center, in which it held that a permit under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System was not required for logging road runoff into two Oregon rivers. Himebaugh praises the Courts holding, noting that the positive impact of theDeckerdecision is widespread. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel to the respondent in this case.]
• At theBlog of Legal Times, Tony Mauroreports on Justice OConnors visit on Wednesday to the law firm Wiley Rein, at which she discussed her most recent book,Out of Order.
• TheHarvard Gazettereports on a conference held at Harvard Law School on Monday, in which Justices OConnor and Souter joined others in discussing the importance of civics education in the United States.