RABBIT RABBIT! THE HOT BENCH WITH WaPo’s ROBERT BARNES
December 1, 2016
THE HOT BENCH
|This week, ROBERT BARNES with The Washington Post made his Hot Bench debut and it is not to be missed. In our interview, the longtime Supreme Court correspondent debunked the myth that SCOTUS is something of a “Hermitville.” Barnes also shared his reactions to the presidential election and how it affects coverage of the Supreme Court. He noted that most coverage leading up to the election was focused on what would to expect from a liberal court under a PRESIDENT HILLARY CLINTON, since most of the speculation before November 8 was that she would be the victor. So now, he said, “It goes back to the way it was with, we would guess, 5 conservatives and 4 liberals. And once again, we speculate about what the future would hold. But this time, we wonder whether the court would become even more conservative.” Read our full interview here.
WHY YOU GOTTA BE SO CRUEL
|For The New Yorker, Lincoln Caplan considers whether the Supreme Court will do its part and stop the state of Texas from executing the intellectually disabled. He writes, “Since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in the United States, in 1976, Texas has been responsible for more than a third of the country’s executions—five hundred and thirty-eight out of a thousand four hundred and forty. The most egregious reason is the state’s unique and grudging approach in cases where the defendant claims intellectual disability.”
THE FIGHT OF OUR LIFETIME
|For The Washington Post, Vanessa Williams and Katie Zezima report voting rights advocates are gearing up for the fight of their lifetime, ready to fight back against a president-elect they believe plans to suppress the vote even more vigorously than it already is.
THREE STRIKES, WE'RE OUT
|The climate, equality and the Supreme Court — Tom Toles in The Washington Post says it’s all going, going, gone, and we’re all the losers in the end. A highlight: when Toles notes DONALD TRUMP is filling his administration with “fossil fuel people” and adds, “Let’s score this one at 200,000 years of damage and throw in a possible sixth mass extinction.”
TROUBLE BEEN DOGGIN MY SOUL
|For The National Law Journal, Tony Mauro reports that Supreme Court justices are getting fed up with lawyers making trouble and adding in extra issues and arguments into cases that were narrow when first granted review. “Twice last month,” he writes, “justices scolded veteran advocates for deviating from or inflating the questions they had asked the court to answer in their cert petitions.”
NO SURPRISE HERE
|USA Today’s Richard Wolf writes DONALD TRUMP’S 21 potential Supreme Court nominees are overwhelmingly white, male and from red states. Wolf profiles the nominees for us and offers a look at some of their key opinions and dissents that shed light on their jurisprudence.
OTHER NEWS
Judge Posner Slams 'Stupid' Decisions by Chief Justice Roberts, 'Silly' Stances by Scalia
The National Law Journal“In a new YouTube video, the outspoken Posner called Roberts a ‘terrible’ manager and blasted his opinions on gay marriage and free speech at abortion clinics.”
Abortion Rights Advocates Challenge Restrictions in Three U.S. States
Reuters“Abortion rights advocates on Wednesday challenged laws restricting the procedures in three states, an aggressive push following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Texas law requiring abortions to be performed in surgical centers or hospitals.”
A Wisconsin court case may be the last best hope to fix gerrymandering by 2020
Vox“Democrats have reason to be frustrated these days. They won the presidential popular vote and the Senate popular vote, and they were just shy of winning the House popular vote. And yet they are entirely shut out of power in Washington. The Electoral College and Senate are here to stay, needless to say, but Democrats do have an unexpected chance to make substantial gains in the House and in state legislatures post-2020 if they can convince the Supreme Court to go along.”