Supreme Court

Justices grapple with question of federal court review in immigration cases

The Supreme Court on Monday heard oral argument in Patel v. Garland, an immigration case that raises a question about federal court review for noncitizens who were denied certain types of discretionary relief. For just over 90 minutes, the justices explored statutory text, legislative history, and the presumption of judicial review.

The case involves Pankajkumar Patel, a citizen of India who has lived and worked in the United States for nearly 30 years. Patel applied for “adjustment of status,” … Read the rest

Supreme Court

Justices will decide scope of judicial review over certain immigration decisions

Patel v. Garland raises an important question about whether a federal court can review a decision by an agency within the Department of Justice that a noncitizen is ineligible for a green card. The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case on Monday.

Congress created a process known as “adjustment of status” so that immigrants physically present in the United States could change their status to that of a lawful permanent resident (i.e., a green card holder) … Read the rest

Supreme Court

Justices to consider obligation of retirement-plan sponsors to pare investment options

Monday’s argument in Hughes v. Northwestern University will give the justices yet another opportunity to explain the fiduciary obligation of the sponsors that control the defined-contribution plans on which so many of us depend for our retirement.

This case comes to the justices under ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1973. Responding to a shocking pattern of self-dealing and mismanagement in employee pension plans, the statute federalized a great deal of the law governing those plans. As … Read the rest

Supreme Court

“Feelings run high”: Two hours of tense debate on an issue that divides the court and the country

A View from the Courtroom is an inside look at significant oral arguments and opinion announcements unfolding in real time.

Outside the Supreme Court building, crowds of demonstrators have gathered for today’s major argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Inside the building, though, the new normal that has existed since the justices returned to the bench in October prevails.

Of course, the courtroom would be packed if we weren’t still under pandemic restrictions. Advocates … Read the rest

Supreme Court

Our equality and liberty are on the line

This article is part of a symposium on the upcoming argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. A preview of the case is here.

Fatima Goss Graves is the president and CEO of the National Women’s Law Center.

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the court will consider the constitutionality of Mississippi House Bill 1510, a ban on abortion at 15 weeks into pregnancy. The Mississippi abortion ban shockingly defies nearly 50 years of precedent following Roe … Read the rest

Supreme Court

The morning read for Wednesday, Nov. 24

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. To suggest a piece for us to consider, email us at roundup@scotusblog.com.

Here’s the Wednesday morning read:

Native Americans are winning at the Supreme Court – with help from Justice Gorsuch ($ ) (John Fritze, USA Today)
The Supreme Court will hear cases that could undercut Biden’s climate agenda. Here’s what to know. (Maxine Joselow, The Washington Post)
The Supreme

… Read the rest

Supreme Court

Court will consider effort by North Carolina legislators to intervene to defend state voter-ID law

In a surprise pre-Thanksgiving order, the Supreme Court on Wednesday added one new case to its merits docket for the 2021-22 term. In Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, the justices will weigh in on an effort by Republican legislators in the state to intervene to defend the state’s voter-ID law.

The North Carolina chapter of the NAACP, along with several local chapters of the group, filed a lawsuit alleging that the law violates the … Read the rest

Supreme Court

In dispute over groundwater, court tells Mississippi it’s equitable apportionment or nothing

Less than two months after oral argument, in its first interstate groundwater case, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that Mississippi must rely on a doctrine known as equitable apportionment if it wants to sue Tennessee over the shared Middle Claiborne Aquifer. In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court squarely rejected Mississippi’s claim that Tennessee is stealing Mississippi’s groundwater, noting that it had “‘consistently denied’ the proposition that a State may exercise exclusive ownership or control of … Read the rest