What’s on Tap for the U.S. Supreme Court? Previewing the October 2018 Term
While it is still unclear whether the U.S. Supreme Court will be comprised of eight members or nine, the justices will begin holding oral arguments for the October 2018 Term in a few short weeks. Starting on October 1st, the Court will hear a number of high-profile disputes on issues ranging from the death penalty to employment discrimination.
Below are several significant cases scheduled for the upcoming term:
Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido: The question before the Court is whether, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the same 20-employee minimum that applies to private employers also applies to political subdivisions of a state, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 6th, 7th, 8th and 10th Circuits have held, or whether the ADEA applies instead to all state political subdivisions of any size, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held in this case.
Madison v. Alabama: The question before the Court is whether, consistent with the Eighth Amendment, and the Supreme Court’s decisions in Ford v. Wainwright and Panetti v. Quarterman, a state may execute a prisoner whose mental disability leaves him with no memory of his commission of the capital offense; and (2) whether evolving standards of decency and the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment bar the execution of a prisoner whose competency has been compromised by vascular dementia and multiple strokes causing severe cognitive dysfunction and a degenerative medical condition that prevents him from remembering the crime for which he was convicted or understanding the circumstances of his scheduled execution.
Gamble v. United States: The question before the Court is whether the Supreme Court should overrule the “separate sovereigns” exception to the Fifth Amendment’s double jeopardy clause, which allows a defendant to be tried in both federal and state court for the same crime.
New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira: The questions before the Court are whether a dispute over applicability of the Federal Arbitration Act’s Section 1 exemption is an arbitrability issue that must be resolved in arbitration pursuant to a valid delegation clause; and (2) whether the FAA’s Section 1 exemption, which applies on its face only to “contracts of employment,” is inapplicable to independent contractor agreements.
Timbs v. Indiana: The question before the Court is whether the Eighth Amendment’s excessive fines clause is incorporated against the states under the Fourteenth Amendment. It remains one of the few provisions in the Bill of Rights that has not yet been made applicable to the states.
Should Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh be confirmed after oral arguments begin, he will not be eligible to vote on those cases in w hich he did not participate. In addition, should the seat of retired Justice Anthony Kennedy remain vacant for an extended period of time, it is highly likely that some cases will result in a 4-4 tie.
Cohen v California — Freedom of Expression Protects Offensive Wordsby DONALD SCARINCI on January 18, 2019
In Cohen v California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Firs...
SCOTUS (Minus Justice Ginsburg) Hears Oral Arguments in Six Casesby DONALD SCARINCI on January 16, 2019
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg missed oral arguments this week as she recovers from surgery to remove ...
Cohen v. California — Freedom of Expression Protects Offensive Wordsby DONALD SCARINCI on January 15, 2019
In Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fir...
- Establishment ClauseFree Exercise Clause
- Freedom of Speech
- Freedoms of Press
- Freedom of Assembly, and Petitition
- The Right to Bear Arms
- Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
- Due Process
- Eminent Domain
- Rights of Criminal Defendants
Preamble to the Bill of Rights
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.