SCOTUS Staying Remote For October Arguments & Providing Live Audio To The Public
September 16, 2020
CALL ME BEEP ME
|The Supreme Court announced today that when it begins its new term in October it will continue the practice of conducting remote oral arguments by phone and making the audio available to the public in real-time. SCOTUS hasn’t heard cases in-person since March due to the pandemic. The new term begins on October 5, kickstarting what could be an unprecedented term as the presidential election has already drawn out hotly contested legal battles over mail-in voting and other emergency election-related petitions. The court has not yet decided how it will handle its November and December argument sessions, as SCOTUS spokesperson KATHY ARBERG said in a statement that the court will closely monitor public health guidance in determining its post-October plans.
MIND ON MY MONEY
|Laura Davison and Laura Litvan with Bloomberg report that both SCOTUS and the U.S. Senate are joining the House in not implementing PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP’S order allowing employers to defer payroll taxes owed by workers. KATHY ARBERG speaking for SCOTUS confirmed that the court wouldn’t stop withholding payroll taxes from employees’ paychecks. Davison and Litvan explain, “The Office of Management and Budget has directed federal agencies, which are part of the executive branch, to stop withholding payroll taxes, which must be paid back next year unless Congress forgives the levies. That could mean sharply higher withholding for those workers in early 2021.”
ED BOARD OVERTURE
|The Editorial Board of The Washington Post argues SCOTUS needs to step into the fight that has been underway in Florida where Republicans are trying to keep felons who have served time from being allowed to vote. Two years ago, Floridians voted overwhelmingly to allow felons to vote, and the Ed Board suggests that only SCOTUS has the power to restore released felons’ voting rights — just as the people of Florida had intended. “Understandably, the Supreme Court often resists meddling in election procedure disputes as Election Day approaches. But the argument to make an exception in this case is compelling. The partisan intent behind the Republican effort is clear. The campaign to ignore the will of the voters is egregious. The practical consequences of a chaotic last-minute disenfranchisement of possibly tens of thousands, in a swing state, just weeks before a presidential election, in the middle of a pandemic that already makes running an election extremely difficult, could be severe. The Supreme Court must step in.”
OTHER NEWS
Texas Supreme Court again blocks county from sending mail-in voting applications to 2 million potential voters
CNN“The Texas Supreme Court on Tuesday again blocked Harris County, Texas, from sending mail-in ballot applications to more than 2 million possible voters while litigation continues. This has been a running fight between Harris County and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has been trying to stop the ballot applications from going out so broadly, saying they should go only to voters qualified to vote by mail. The ruling concerns only applications to vote by mail, and not ballots.”
Pivotal Harvard race discrimination case to be weighed by U.S. appeals court
Reuters“A federal appeals court on Wednesday will consider whether Harvard University discriminates against Asian-American applicants in a closely-watched case that could impact whether U.S. colleges can use race as a factor in admissions. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston will hear arguments in a lawsuit brought by Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), a non-profit founded by anti-affirmative action activist Edward Blum, and backed by the Trump administration. The group sued Harvard in 2014, claiming it illegally engages in “racial balancing” that artificially limits the number of Asian-American students at the Ivy League school. Harvard denies the allegation and says it is legally promoting student body diversity in keeping with Supreme Court precedent.”