EARLY PREDICTIONS FROM SCOTUS | Chemerinsky On Death Penalty Investigations | Hot New Book Review
October 30, 2017
EYES ON ME, EYES ON ME
|Although the big news of the day comes to us from a case brewing outside the Supreme Court, there’s still some SCOTUS stuff you need to know about…
EARLY PREDICTIONS
|AP reports the justices appear likely to rule for an inmate on Texas’ death row who was denied money to investigate his history of mental illness and other claims that could spare him from being executed.
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH
|In The Washington Post, University of Virginia law professor Brandon Garrett analyzes today’s death penalty case that could bring important new focus to the standard of whether experts must be appointed to the defense in capital punishment cases. Garrett: “The case goes to the core of what we expect our legal system to do: fully uncover the truth — on both sides — when the most serious criminal accusations are brought to court.”
TOP-ED
|In the Los Angeles Times, Erwin Chemerinsky notes that an upcoming Supreme Court case could give the poor a better chance to escape the death penalty — and that could be a very good thing. He opines, “The Supreme Court now has an opportunity to ensure that everyone who faces the death penalty, no matter where they are in the U.S., will have the chance to uncover the information that might make a difference to a jury. No one should be put to death just because he or she is too poor to conduct an investigation.”
HOT NEW BOOK REVIEW
|“Reading ‘Scalia Speaks’ — the marvelous collection of his speeches, lovingly compiled by his son and a former law clerk — brought Nino back to life for me. His words, even when read, are provocations to argue, disagree and think. They cannot be read passively. They cry out for dialogue. They demand answers — or surrender.” Alan M. Dershowitz in The New York Times reviews the new book that pays homage to the late JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA. “’Scalia Speaks’ gives us a glimpse of the man, as I came to know and respect him, despite — no, because of — our arguments.
OTHER NEWS
Supreme Court Declines To Hear Gun Case From West Virginia
The Associated Press“The Supreme Court is leaving in place an appeals court ruling that concluded police can frisk someone they believe has a weapon. The court declined Monday to take a case out of West Virginia in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit concluded that an officer who makes a lawful traffic stop and has a reasonable suspicion that one of the automobile’s occupants is armed may frisk that individual for the officer’s protection and the safety of everyone on the scene.”
Supreme Court Turns Down Property-Rights Challenge To Developer Fees In West Hollywood
Los Angeles Times“The Supreme Court said Monday it has turned down a property rights case from West Hollywood that challenged a California requirement that developers subsidize the creation of affordable housing. The justices said Monday they will not hear an appeal from the builders of an 11-unit condo who said the fees violate the Constitution’s prohibition against taking private property ‘for public use without just compensation.’”
4 Texas Death Row Inmates Lose Appeals at U.S. Supreme Court
The Associated Press“An East Texas woman on death row for the slaying of her developmentally disabled baby sitter and a man convicted of the killings of four people in suburban Dallas are among four condemned Texas prisoners losing appeals at the U.S. Supreme Court.”