Category Archives: SCOTUS

WaPo: Justice Department asks Supreme Court to moot Microsoft email case, citing new law

WaPo: Justice Department asks Supreme Court to moot Microsoft email case, citing new law by Ellen Nakashima: Now that Congress has made clear that a U.S. search warrant covers emails stored overseas, the Justice Department on Friday asked the Supreme … Continue reading

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on WaPo: Justice Department asks Supreme Court to moot Microsoft email case, citing new law

NPR: Police Shootings Stir Outrage Among Some, But Not The Supreme Court

NPR: Police Shootings Stir Outrage Among Some, But Not The Supreme Court by Nina Totenburg: The U.S. Supreme Court has again stepped into the bitter public turmoil over police shootings of civilians, ruling Monday that an Arizona police officer is … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity, SCOTUS | Comments Off on NPR: Police Shootings Stir Outrage Among Some, But Not The Supreme Court

Volokh Conspiracy: The Supreme Court’s Continuing Immunity Crusade

Volokh Conspiracy: The Supreme Court’s Continuing Immunity Crusade by Will Baude A few thoughts on today’s summary reversal in Kisela v. Hughes.

Posted in Qualified immunity, SCOTUS | Comments Off on Volokh Conspiracy: The Supreme Court’s Continuing Immunity Crusade

NYTimes: Our Increasingly Unenforceable Constitution

NYTimes: Our Increasingly Unenforceable Constitution by Stephen I. Vladeck

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on NYTimes: Our Increasingly Unenforceable Constitution

Today is the 55th anniversary of Gideon v. Wainwright

Gideon v. Wainwright was decided 55 years ago today. Thank you to the Public Defenders of America.

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on Today is the 55th anniversary of Gideon v. Wainwright

NYTimes: Justice Scalia’s Fading Legacy

NYTimes: Justice Scalia’s Fading Legacy by Linda Greenhouse His Fourth Amendment opinions, on balance, more favored privacy against the government.

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on NYTimes: Justice Scalia’s Fading Legacy

WaPo: Supreme Court to hear Microsoft case: A question of law and borders

WaPo: Supreme Court to hear Microsoft case: A question of law and borders by Ellen Nakashima:

Posted in E-mail, F.R.Crim.P. 41, SCOTUS | Comments Off on WaPo: Supreme Court to hear Microsoft case: A question of law and borders

Vice: Neil Gorsuch is shaping up to be an unlikely defender of your privacy

Vice: Neil Gorsuch is shaping up to be an unlikely defender of your privacy by Carter Sherman & Isabella McKinley Corbo. We’ll see.

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on Vice: Neil Gorsuch is shaping up to be an unlikely defender of your privacy

SCOTUSBlog: Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly?

SCOTUSBlog: Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly? by Richard Re:

Posted in Exclusionary rule, SCOTUS | Comments Off on SCOTUSBlog: Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly?

SCOTUSblog: Symposium: Whatever happens in US v. Microsoft, three themes will persist

SCOTUSblog: Symposium: Whatever happens in US v. Microsoft, three themes will persist

Posted in E-mail, SCOTUS | Comments Off on SCOTUSblog: Symposium: Whatever happens in US v. Microsoft, three themes will persist

Reason: Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito Butt Heads Over the Fourth Amendment, Again

Reason: Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito Butt Heads Over the Fourth Amendment, Again by Damon Root: Gorsuch advances another property rights theory of the Fourth Amendment that Alito rejects.

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on Reason: Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito Butt Heads Over the Fourth Amendment, Again

SCOTUSblog: Argument analysis: Rental cars, reasonable expectations of privacy and property rights

SCOTUSblog: Argument analysis: Rental cars, reasonable expectations of privacy and property rights by Amy Howe. Transcripts: Byrd & Collins

Posted in Automobile exception, Curtilage, SCOTUS, Standing | Comments Off on SCOTUSblog: Argument analysis: Rental cars, reasonable expectations of privacy and property rights