SCOTUS Blocks House From Mueller Grand Jury Evidence | How Lisa Blatt Prepped For Remote Oral Arguments

May 21, 2020

Yesterday, SCOTUS temporarily blocked a lower court order requiring the Justice Department turn over to the House Judiciary Committee secret evidence compiled during ROBERT MUELLER’S investigation last year. The evidence had been requested more than a year ago, but the unsigned order from the Supreme Court keeps that evidence under lock until at least early summer. At that time, the high court will decide whether to extend its hold and schedule the case for arguments in the fall. The delay could have been put in place so that justices avoid making a decision altogether should DONALD TRUMP lose the election or Republicans take back control of the House. SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI said in a statement yesterday, “The House’s long-standing right to obtain grand jury information pursuant to the House’s impeachment power has now been upheld by the lower courts twice. These rulings are supported by decades of precedent and should be permitted to proceed.”

Leah Litman with Slate studied how well CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS did at giving his colleagues equal time to question lawyers during this month’s teleconference oral arguments. What she found was not even a little bit shocking. Chief Justice Roberts allowed the three longest periods of questioning to go to his conservative colleagues who happen to be all men, while the three shortest questioning periods were all by female justices — two from JUSTICE GINSBURG and one from JUSTICE KAGAN. And because Roberts was so focused on keeping time, he would often have to interrupt the questioning to move onto the next justice for their opportunity to grill the advocates. Usually he found a pause in the back and forth to interject, say “thank you” and then move on to the next of his colleagues. But 11 times he had to interrupt his colleagues while they were speaking — each of which was an interruption of a liberal member of the court, and nine of which was an interruption of a female colleague. Litman writes, “At his confirmation hearings, the chief justice likened the role of a judge to that of an umpire. But umpires need to be willing to enforce the rules against everyone, even ALITO.”

Harper Neidig with The Hill reports that four death row inmates are asking for a delay of a court order that would pave the way for their executions while they appeal their case to the Supreme Court. “The inmates lost an appeal at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in their legal challenge against the Trump administration’s new execution protocols. Their legal team asked the D.C. Circuit to delay its mandate by two weeks in order to prepare a petition for the Supreme Court. In a filing submitted to the appeals court, the lawyers said it is critically important to resolve the legal questions surrounding the administration’s execution procedures before allowing federal death sentences to resume for the first time since 2003.”

“The Supreme Court and courts across the country will see an increasing number of pandemic-related disputes in the coming weeks concerning prison conditions and whether prisons are violating the constitutional rights of inmates by failing to adequately protect them against the coronavirus.” That’s Ariane de Vogue with CNN reporting that inmates are sounding the alarm over their treatment during the pandemic, and asking for more appropriate measures to be taken to protect their health and hygiene during this time. JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR made note of this issue earlier this month when inmates had argued that their prison conditions during the COVID crisis amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. The justice wrote, “It has long been said that a society’s worth can be judged by taking stock of its prisons. That is all the truer in this pandemic, where inmates everywhere have been rendered vulnerable and often powerless to protect themselves from harm.”

Brandon Sanchez with The Wall Street Journal reports on how Supreme Court veteran LISA BLATT handled having to argue a case before SCOTUS from her dining room. To prepare, she ordered a lectern to her home to replicate the in-person experience of arguing before justices and she did moot court-practice via telephone. Sanchez writes, “Ms. Blatt also confronted possible land mines: the dog and the doorbell. Neither could derail her actual arguments taking place May 4. Ms. Blatt’s son took Jackson, the family’s goldendoodle, for a two-hour walk to Washington’s Rock Creek Park. They also asked their next-door neighbors who have a dog, a loud barker, to crate their pet during the day. To silence the doorbell, Ms. Blatt’s husband, David, served as a ‘bouncer,’ stationed outside, ready to intercept deliveries. And her daughter kept time to help Ms. Blatt stay on-track while arguing.”