Justices will review scope of identity theft in case involving Medicaid fraud

Justices will review scope of identity theft in case involving Medicaid fraud

Share

The Supreme Court announced on Thursday afternoon that it will weigh in on what it means to commit identity theft. After holding their private conference a day early because Friday is a federal holiday, the justices released a one-sentence order list that added one new case to their merits docket for the 2022-23 term: Dubin v. United States.

The defendant in the case is David Dubin, who was convicted of Medicaid fraud. As the dispute comes to the … Read the rest

Justices seem receptive to opening up early challenges to agency proceedings

Justices seem receptive to opening up early challenges to agency proceedings

Share

The justices heard nearly three hours of arguments Monday in a pair of cases challenging the traditional framework of agency review: Axon Enterprise v. Federal Trade Commission and Securities and Exchange Commission v. Cochran. If those arguments tell us anything, several justices are strongly inclined to accept the invitation of these cases to reshape the traditional framework, under which challenges to agency proceedings have to wait until the end of those proceedings before they can get into … Read the rest

Elon Musk, internet freedom, and how the Supreme Court might force big tech into a catch-22

Elon Musk, internet freedom, and how the Supreme Court might force big tech into a catch-22

Share

“The bird is freed,” Elon Musk tweeted on the night he completed his $ 44 billion purchase of Twitter.

What he didn’t say is that a series of court cases may soon clip its wings.

A self-described free-speech absolutist, Musk has suggested he will loosen Twitter’s content-moderation rules, allow more objectionable speech to remain on the site, and reinstate some users who have been banned. Three days after reassuring advertisers that he won’t let Twitter become a “free-for-all hellscape,” he … Read the rest

Jamaican green-card holder asks court to overrule precedent on “crimes involving moral turpitude”

Jamaican green-card holder asks court to overrule precedent on “crimes involving moral turpitude”

Share

The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here.

In its 1951 decision in Jordan v. De George, the Supreme Court held that the term “crime involving moral turpitude” in federal immigration law is not unconstitutionally vague. The term lacks any statutory definition, however, and courts around the country have since struggled to apply it evenly and frequently … Read the rest

In habeas case, the liberal justices try to untangle a complex statute

In habeas case, the liberal justices try to untangle a complex statute

Share

On Tuesday, the court heard argument in Jones v. Hendrix, a case that exemplifies the Gordian knot that is the federal habeas corpus statute.

As I discussed in my case preview, the underlying problem the case presents is weighty: The petitioner, Marcus DeAngelo Jones, was convicted at trial of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and sentenced to more than 27 years’ incarceration. Two decades into his prison term, … Read the rest

Affirmative action appears in jeopardy after marathon arguments

Affirmative action appears in jeopardy after marathon arguments

Share

In 2003, a divided Supreme Court ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that the University of Michigan Law School could consider race in its admissions process as part of its efforts to assemble a diverse student body. In her opinion for the majority, now-retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor suggested that, in 25 years, “the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” But during nearly five hours of oral arguments on Monday, the … Read the rest

A guide to the amicus briefs in the affirmative-action cases

A guide to the amicus briefs in the affirmative-action cases

Share

Nearly 100 amicus briefs were filed in Students for Fair Admissions v. the University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, the cases questioning the use of affirmative action in undergraduate admissions at both public and private universities.

Thirty-three briefs support SFFA and 60 briefs support the universities. We reviewed them all and summarized many of the noteworthy arguments.

The cases will be argued on Monday. For background on the … Read the rest

A business perspective: Diversity in university admissions is a compelling interest

A business perspective: Diversity in university admissions is a compelling interest

Share

This article is part of a symposium on the upcoming arguments in Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. A preview of the case is here.

Michael R. Dreeben is a partner and Natalie Camastra and Kelly Kambourelis are associates at O’Melveny & Myers LLP. They were counsel on an amicus brief supporting UNC and Harvard.

The business case for diversity in university admissions … Read the rest