Behind The Scenes Of The Supreme Court’s Très Busy Season
June 4, 2021
AN UNLIKELY ALLIANCE
|ina Totenberg with NPR reports on the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday regarding federal computer fraud law and notes the justices divided along unusual lines. They ruled 6-3 to reverse the conviction of a police sergeant who was paid to access license place information. JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRETT wrote the majority opinion and she was joined by the three liberal justices as well as JUSTICES NEIL GORSUCH and BRETT KAVANAUGH. Totenberg: “At issue was the interpretation of the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, a federal law that makes it a crime for an individual to ‘exceed authorized access to a computer’ in order to obtain information he is ‘not entitled so to obtain.’ The court’s decision narrowed the reach of the statute, which has long been used as the principal tool in fighting cybercrime. Though Congress could certainly amend the statute to once again broaden what conduct is covered, there are more groups that would fight such an expansion than existed in 1986 when the law was first enacted.”
DO MI MI, MI SO SO
|Jess Bravin with The Wall Street Journal points out that in JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRETT’S 20-page opinion in the computer access case, she focused on the grammatical significance of the modifier “so.” Bravin explains, “Justice Barrett drew a sharp distinction: The law covers people who, although they are authorized to use a computer system, obtain files that are off-limits to them. But it doesn’t reach those who are entitled to access particular information—like Nathan Van Buren, a former Cumming, Ga., police sergeant who was authorized to use the motor-vehicle database—even if they misuse the data they pull. To read the law more broadly ‘would attach criminal penalties to a breathtaking amount of commonplace computer activity,’ Justice Barrett wrote. ‘Employers commonly state that computers and electronic devices can be used only for business purposes. So on the Government’s reading of the statute, an employee who sends a personal e-mail or reads the news using her work computer has violated the CFAA,’ she wrote.”
PANDEMIC? RENT? FORGET ABOUT IT
|A coalition of realtor groups asked SCOTUS yesterday to block the CDC’s order that prohibits landlords from evicting tenants who fail to pay rent. The order is meant to offer relief to those falling on hard times due to the COVID-19 pandemic and it’s set to expire on June 30. Ariane de Vogue with CNN reports, “A district court ruled against the CDC, holding that the moratorium was unlawful, but then put its ruling on hold pending appeal. The DC Circuit declined to lift the stay. The Realtor groups asked the justices to step in – on an emergency basis – arguing that ‘Congress never gave the CDC the staggering amount of power it now claims.’ They argue that the moratorium has resulted in ‘over $13 billion in unpaid rent per month.'”
BEHIND THE SCENES OF SCOTUS
|“Supreme Court justices have known for months whether the Affordable Care Act will be struck down. They’ve decided whether a Catholic social service agency may refuse to screen same-sex couples as foster parents. And they’ve resolved whether a school wrongly disciplined a cheerleader who posted a profane Snapchat rant when she failed to make varsity. But they won’t tell the public just yet. That’s because unlike in Congress, where a vote among members is the end of the matter, a vote at the court is just the beginning.” Joan Biskupic with CNN takes us behind the scenes of the Supreme Court’s busiest season and reviews the process that goes into justices deciding a case.