Tag Archives: presidential immunity

A Bizarre Thing Happened on the Way to Presidential Immunity

As has been discussed in multiple posts over the years, the Supreme Court has a lot of conventions related to opinions.  First, opinions are assigned by the senior justice (either the Chief Justice or the Associate Justice with the most seniority) in the majority.  Second, in making those assignments, there is an effort to spread the work around — both within each months argument session and across the term as a whole.  Third, the most junior justices tend to get the less significant cases.  But the events of this week creates a potential situation where one of the last two conventions might be about to be broken as the second convention hints that Justice Jackon has the Presidential Immunity case but the third convention says that’s not possible.

Going into this week, we were down to 12-14 opinions, and these conventions gave us some hint of what was to come down.  And then reality struck and has tossed us a big curveball.  To further understand the process, one detail about the Supreme Court’s conventions.  On opinion days, the Supreme Court starts releasing opinions at 10 a.m. Eastern Time.  In releasing opinions, they move from the most junior justice to the most senior justice (the Chief) with any per curiam (unsigned) opinion released after all of the signed opinions.  When a justice has more than one opinion, it is unclear if the justice chooses which case is released first or if it goes by case number or argument date.

So back to where we were before the first opinion day this week (Wednesday).  We were done with cases from October and November.  We had two cases left from December.  To keep balance for the term, every justice needed, at least, two opinions through December and the Chief Justice and Justice Gorsuch only had one opinion each.  (Because there were nineteen opinions, one justice would have three opinions, but we already knew that justice was Justice Kavanaugh. Continue Reading...

Posted in Judicial | Also tagged , Comments Off on A Bizarre Thing Happened on the Way to Presidential Immunity

Supreme Court Term 2023-24 — Two Weeks to Go (?) Update

This past week, the U.S. Supreme Court went from one opinion day (Thursday) per week to two opinion days (Thursday and Friday).  But the Supreme Court only issued three opinions on each day — four of the six have some political significance and so there will be posts on them later.  There are still 23 cases left to be decided (with 21-23 opinions) between them.  Thus unless, the pace of opinions picks up (and maybe 4 per day is likely), the Supreme Court needs at least seven opinion days between now and June 28.  The next opinion day is this Thursday.  While it is more likely than not that opinions will also be released on Friday, that would still leave four or five opinion days for the last week in June.  Maybe the last opinion day will be July 1 or July 2, but the Supreme Court tries really hard to leave town before July 4.

With this week’s opinion release, the dust has started to settle on who likely has what opinion.  Until opinions are released, such guesses are who likely initially got the opinion.  While not common, splits in how to decide a case and justices changing their minds as they dig further into writing an opinion can result in opinions being reassigned.  These predictions are based on the Supreme Court’s practice of trying to maintain a balanced workload — both within each month’s argument session and across the term as a whole.

At this point, enough opinions have been released to identify who still has opinions left to write from the first five months of arguments with two question marks.  The two question marks are two sets of companion cases — one from January in which two cases seek to overturn Chevron deference (a doctrine created by Justice Scalia that has courts deferring to administrative agencies over the proper interpretation of ambiguous regulatory statutes) and the other from February in which two cases involve state attempts to regulate interstate social media websites.  For both sets, it is possible that the Supreme Court will issue separate “authored” (i.e. the justice writing is identified) or that the Supreme Court will issue one “authored” opinion in one case with a brief per curiam (i.e. the justice writing is not identified) in the second case or that the Supreme Court will issue one opinion covering both cases.  If only one authoried opinion is released in both sets of cases, then things fall more smoothly in terms of the number of opinions per justice through February.  If either set has a second authored opinion, that adds an additional opinion for some justice making things more uncertain. Continue Reading...

Posted in Judicial | Also tagged , , , , , , , , Comments Off on Supreme Court Term 2023-24 — Two Weeks to Go (?) Update

The Supreme Court and January 6

Monday marks the start of the two-week “April” argument session at the Supreme Court — traditionally, the last argument session of the term.  After next week, the Supreme Court will spend the next two months finishing up the opinions.  (As of today, we have 14 opinions in the 51 cases heard in the first six argument sessions of the term.  As we get later in the term and have more opinions issued, there will be posts about which justice might have each case.  For now, there are not enough opinions issued to support any attempt to read the tea leaves.)

This session features two crucial cases related to January 6.  The first, being heard on April 16 involves the legal reach of the obstruction charge which has been filed against a significant number of defendants, including prisoner in the dock Donald J. Trump.  The second, being heard on April 25 (a special semi-expedited Thursday argument) involves whether Donald J. Trump has any immunity to the pending charges.

The April 16 argument comes in the case of Fischer vs. United States.  This appeal arises in the context of a motion to dismiss filed Mr. Fischer.  The essence of a motion to dismiss is a pre-trial claim that the conduct alleged by the government is not conduct covered by the offense charged.  The trial court agreed with Mr. Fischer, but the appellate court reversed. Continue Reading...

Posted in Donald Trump, Judicial | Also tagged , , Comments Off on The Supreme Court and January 6