THE HOT BENCH WITH ADAM LIPTAK | HISTORY MADE, AT SCOTUS AND THE BALL GAME
November 3, 2016
THE HOT BENCH — FEAT. ADAM LIPTAK
|This week’s Hot Bench features New York Times copyboy turned Supreme Court correspondent, Adam Liptak. He spoke with SCOTUSDaily about his career covering the court, which wasn’t exactly love at first sight. “I wasn’t super eager to move to Washington, or follow Linda [Greenhouse], or to take on a beat that, although prestigious, is in some ways very confining journalistically.” Catch the full interview and learn more about how Liptak rose through the ranks and started covering the Supreme Court — a position that he now very much enjoys.
HISTORY MADE
|The Chicago Cubs put an end to their 108-year championship drought last night, and they did so in the most epic way. Game 7, ten innings, a wee bit of rain, and one hell of a ball game. And though we’re very happy for the Cubs and their big day, we’re overjoyed for former Supreme Court justice and lifetime Cubs fan, JOHN PAUL STEVENS. This one’s for you.
HISTORY MADE?
|Is it possible that the Supreme Court made history yesterday and ended a drought of their own? Word has it that at argument three female attorneys argued before the court, meaning the women outnumbered the men. 5 male justices, 3 female justices, and 3 attorneys. That’s some good math. (S/O to Professor Kent Greenfield for the tip!)
HOLY COW
|Big, no huge, no YUGE news from the Supreme Court today — the institution will host its first-ever video webcast tomorrow, November 4, at 1:45 PM ET as a part of a commemoration of the late JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA’S life and work. Executive Director of Fix the Court, GABE ROTH noted, “The webcast announcement was a shock, though a much appreciated one. I hope it is a sign that the voices of reason and modernity are gaining acceptance inside the building.”
A MESSAGE FROM POTUS
|Perhaps there’s no one more upset about the GOP senators’ threats to block HILLARY CLINTON’S Supreme Court nominees indefinitely than PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA. “They’re already promising even more unprecedented dysfunction in Washington, which is pretty hard to do!”
IN A PICKLE
|Amber Phillips with The Washington Post says sure, Senate Republicans could block any and all of Clinton’s SCOTUS nominees, but that doesn’t mean they should. Because if they stick with this plan, it will undoubtedly backfire.
TOP-ED
|Should we shrink the Supreme Court? It’s a question Steve Chapman mulls in the Chicago Tribune as he considers the growing threats of a never-ending SCOTUS blockade. He writes, “When you can’t win a fair contest you have a few choices. You can gracefully accept the loss and try to do better next time. Or you can flip the board over and stomp away.” Who could be possibly be talking about?
BREATHE EASY AND VOTE
|For The Nation, Michael Keegan and Tom Steyer note that with the Supreme Court on the line, this election could determine the future of our environment. Because while HILLARY CLINTON has pledged to make addressing climate change and clean energy a priority, DONALD TRUMP thinks climate change is a “hoax.” They write, “Which means it’s up to us: We must show up, we must vote, and we must win. Our future truly depends on it.”
GOTTA LAUGH
|Tony Mauro with The National Law Journal reports JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN leads JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR on laughs, but she’s lagging behind in dissents. Plus, he shares which of the Obama nominees is more liberal, and whose case has been most cited.
LOVE IS A BATTLEFIELD
|“The marvel of Loving is that it’s not really a triumphant legal drama; it’s more like a romance that happens to have a Supreme Court case in the mix.” The film comes out today.
OTHER NEWS
LIFE Magazine and Loving: The Photos That Captured a History-Making Couple
TIME“When LIFE photographer Grey Villet visited Richard and Mildred Loving in 1966, the Virginia couple had little desire for publicity. But after being essentially banished from the state for the crime of miscegenation — Richard was white and Mildred was black, at a time when Virginia and 17 other states outlawed interracial marriage — their case was on its way to the Supreme Court, so they had little choice in their fame.”