JUSTICES SIDE WITH TRUMP OVER DACA DOCUMENTS | A Woman’s Right Under Siege | Greenhouse On Why Judges Matter
December 21, 2017
HOLD YOUR HORSES
|The Supreme Court yesterday indicated that federal courts in California moved too fast in ordering the Trump administration to disclose documents concerning its decision to end the DACA program that protected some 800,000 young immigrants from deportation. The justices’ unsigned opinion instructed the lower courts to consider the administration’s arguments on two threshold legal issues before requiring that the documents be turned over.
ALL HAIL THE CHIEF
|Joan Biskupic with CNN reports that yesterday CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS called for a review of the federal judiciary’s procedures for protecting court employees from misconduct — two days after JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI stepped down following several sexual abuse allegations from former law clerks of his.
AT BAT A WOMAN'S RIGHT
|In their first private conference in the new year, the justices will consider one very important question: Do undocumented immigrant teens who are pregnant have a right to an abortion? Lyle Denniston writing for Constitution Daily notes the justices will take on this question on January 5. So far, the only answer we’ve seen from lower courts has been a tentative yes. It’s up to the Supreme Court to make the final determination.
TOP-ED – WHY JUDGES MATTER
|“The Trump administration’s increasingly bizarre war on abortion continues as immigration officials keep trying to block access to abortion for pregnant undocumented teenagers in their custody. The administration has no law on its side (leading career lawyers in the Justice Department to withhold their signatures from its legal pleadings) but still won’t stop exploiting the plight of these most vulnerable young women, for no apparent reason other than a commitment to saving the world one fetus at a time.” That’s Linda Greenhouse opining in The New York Times that judges matter greatly in the defense of women’s rights that are currently under siege by the current administration.
HER BODY, THEIR CHOICE
|Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern writes that while the Trump administration claims blocking abortions is in the “best interests” of undocumented minors, it still refuses to explain why. “The administration’s hard-line stance all but ensures that the constitutionality of its policies will eventually require Supreme Court resolution.”
TODAY IN HISTORY
|On this day in 1970, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had the constitutional right to set voting age requirements for federal elections. That decision was 5-4 and is known as Oregon v. Mitchell. However, a different 5-4 majority found that Congress could not set voting requirements in local and state elections. Andrew Glass with POLITICO has the story.
OTHER NEWS
Trump's 'So-Called Judge' Set To Review 11-Nation Refugee Ban
Bloomberg“Donald Trump’s immigration agenda is back in court with a challenge to his October ban on refugees from 11 countries — before a judge who didn’t rule to the president’s liking in the past. Nine of the countries on the list account for 80 percent of the Muslim refugees entering the U.S., leading resettlement agencies and civil rights groups to claim the policy is driven by an ‘irrational prejudice against refugees in general’ and religious animus against Muslims.”
SCOTUS Clerks And Diversity: A Conversation
The National Law Journal“New research by Supreme Court correspondent Tony Mauro found coveted clerkships at the Supreme Court continue to mostly still go to white male lawyers. Mauro discussed the findings with former clerk and former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal. The two also took questions from callers about why the numbers of diverse lawyers are so low, and what the court could — and is or isn’t — doing about it.”