Hundreds Of Lawyers Share Their Own Abortion Stories With Justices | Calls Grow From Conservatives For An End To Life Tenure At SCOTUS
December 5, 2019
A PUSH FOR PROGRESS
|Deanna Paul with The Washington Post reports on the hundreds of lawyers and legal professionals who signed onto an amicus brief filed this week ahead of the Supreme Court’s upcoming abortion case. The 368 signers have all had the abortion procedure, and now they’re all partners at top-10 law firms, counsel to Fortune 100 companies, public defenders, prosecutors, retired judges, award-winning professors and current law students. Paul writes, “Having exercised what they say is their right to a safe and legal abortion, for varied personal and medical reasons, the women said they were compelled to tell the nation’s highest court the role it played in their life trajectories.”
WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER
|Fix the Court highlights recent commentary from conservative thinkers on the need for an end to life tenure at the Supreme Court. A statement from the organization notes, “Support among conservative thinkers is hardly surprising, given that SCOTUS term limits enjoys the support of wide majorities of Americans. A recent Marquette Law School poll found that 72% of Americans support term limits, with no significant difference between liberals and conservatives. That number mirrors a Fix the Court poll in June 2019, which found 77% overall support for term limits, including from 73% of Republicans.”
TOP-ED
|Linda Greenhouse with The New York Times discusses the current “gunfight at the Supreme Court” over a New York City gun regulation. She opens her piece with, “I don’t know how the Second Amendment case the Supreme Court heard this week will turn out, but I do know this: If the subject weren’t so serious, the case in its current posture, with substantial doubt about whether there is even a dispute left for the court to decide, would be downright funny.”
POD DU JOUR
|Slate’s What Next podcast takes a look at the case from Montana that justices heard this week. Kathleen McLaughlin, a reporter based in Montana, joins the pod to discuss the “toxic mess” that reached SCOTUS.
READ THE FINE PRINT
|In hearing a major retirement fund dispute yesterday, the Supreme Court appeared skeptical of Intel Corp’s effort to avoid a lawsuit accusing it of violating federal law in making employee retirement plan investments that cost beneficiaries hundreds of millions of dollars. Andrew Chung with Reuters notes, “The case is significant for companies because it could expand the time that many plan beneficiaries have to bring lawsuits, which could lead to higher damages. Conservative and liberal justices alike seemed to sympathize with the former Intel employee who filed suit in 2015 claiming he did not have ‘actual knowledge’ of the alleged investment problems because he did not read the relevant documents that were only posted online.”
FORGIVE ME?
|Richard Wolf with USA Today reports on the one shot PRESIDENT TRUMP has left in keeping his financial records secret: the Supreme Court. “Efforts by Congress and prosecutors in New York to obtain several years of tax returns and other documents pertaining to Trump’s personal and business affairs will be decided in the next few months by a court the president has both beseeched and berated. The beseeching will resume Thursday when Trump’s personal lawyers ask the justices to hear his appeal of lower court rulings that eight years of financial documents must be provided to a House committee investigating illegal conduct and conflicts of interest.”
OTHER NEWS
14 States Ask Supreme Court To Let Trump Resume Federal Executions
The Hill“More than a dozen states on Wednesday filed a brief to the Supreme Court expressing support for the Trump administration’s push to resume federal executions. The filing by 14 states, which each permit capital punishment, came a day after the Trump administration asked the justices to authorize the U.S. government to carry out four death sentences.”
Feds Ask SCOTUS To OK State Regulation Of Pharmacy Benefits
Bloomberg“The U.S. Supreme Court should confirm that states may regulate how companies like Express Scripts and CVS Health reimburse pharmacies for prescription drugs, the U.S. Solicitor General said in a brief. Noel J. Francisco, along with Solicitor of Labor Kate S. O’Scannlain, urged the justices to hear a case asking whether an Arkansas law regulating pharmacy benefit managers is preempted by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act.”