SCOTUS Watch

A few more days left of the term, so a Thursday opinion day added ... to deal with two cases. First a RBG civil procedure special:

Roberts announces that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has the first opinion, in Animal Science Products Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. Ginsburg writes for a unanimous court that a federal court determining foreign law under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should accord “respectful consideration” to a foreign government’s submission, but is not bound to give “conclusive effect” to the foreign government’s statements.

This means the revival of the respondent’s U.S. antitrust suit against Chinese companies for allegedly price-fixing their Vitamin C exports.

No separate opinions or dissents. The political opinion had a fairly expected if limited approach:

Not every Supreme Court decision about elections is a disaster, and the ruling in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky striking down Minnesota’s very broad ban on wearing political apparel in polling places is a pretty good one. Although the court struck down a law [Rick Hasen] thought it should have upheld, the opinion shows a more realistic and functional understanding of the political process than the court has shown in campaign finance cases. It gives states ample room to assure that people can vote at polling places free of political pressure and intimidation.

It was a Chief Roberts minimalism special with two liberals dissenting in a short opinion wishing the state court got a chance to clarify the statute.  But, it wasn't with much passion, since as Rick Hasen noted, the opinion left open the chance for broad regulation at a polling place. A polling place not being a public forum as such, the government can limit what is said there, including with political apparel. It just has to be clear about it.

Next set should come next Monday unless an order pops up.