SCOTUS Watch

The post-holiday Order List included some "grants," including one case involving obtaining information about DOGE. A "miscellaneous order" seems not noteworthy. 

A long-time prisoner allegedly murdered specifically to be put to death. Talk about hard cases. The whole system is problematic. Plus, places without the death penalty handle such situations. 

It took around seventeen years, but Florida did so today. No final appeal. Florida cancelled a more iffy execution involving an older prisoner with health problems. 

White Sox Blows It

White Sox lost their divisional lead. They had a shot at a bye. They had to play an extra round in another ballpark. 

But that was against the Astros. Who were .500. White Sox won two and advanced. Win a game and effectively they had home field advantage once more. They won two.

Had two shots in front of their home fans. Lost both games. One more shot in Cleveland. Lost it. What a crappy way to end a great season. Win four in a row. Lose three in a row and be eliminated. 

ICE Shooting in the Bronx

ICE shot someone through a car window while his five-year-old son was in the car. It took place in the Bronx. I know the area.

We were later assured that the agents on the scene, who were in plainclothes (some wore masks), did not know about the child! 

Democrats and opponents of strict immigration policy were criticized, as was the person who was shot. The mayor strongly pushed back. As well, he should. Reckless assholes. More here.

SCOTUS Begins Once More

The Supreme Court has a "long conference" at the end of the term to dispose of a bunch of pending cases left over from the summer. They welcomed the beginning of the new 2026 term with a long Order List,  disposing of most of them.

(The start of the term changed over time.) 

Some conservatives and Kagan, including Alito (who didn't take part in the first argument of the term), didn't take part in various decisions. Kagan and Jackson are the only justices who consistently (referencing the voluntary ethics rules) say why. 

If you skim the Order List, you will notice some odds and ends. Kavanaugh, without saying why, would have granted cert. (argument) in one case. The case involves class actions. You have to go to the docket page since the Order List is just a screenshot without links, as would be the case on a more useful website.

The Supreme Court, since the 1990s, has a policy of blocking in forma pauperis appeals when it believes a person has overused the privilege. Jackson eventually decided not to go along when the person is incarcerated, and it was a noncriminal appeal. 

Sotomayor issued a statement. She was concerned about a judge whose criminal sanction of a juror led other jurors to feel they could not be totally open about their concerns. She explained it was procedurally not a good challenge. But, as she has done before (often involving criminal issues), she emphasized that it is a serious issue. 

Justice Alito is promoting a book. It is a collection of essays. The book's title promotes him as a supporter of originalism. His bona fides there are mixed, but the term is plastic enough that it likely works.

I commented on multiple posts on the website at the link. The conservative-leaning law professor is a tad too enthusiastic. One stupid bit involves him asserting that same-sex marriage cases had many concrete effects, while Roe v. Wade was more about women's position in society. 

As one person noted, there is nothing much more "concrete" than pregnancy. Likewise, it is not like same-sex marriage cases don't have ideological implications. Alito, for instance, has joined Thomas in alleging the cases somehow threaten the liberty of religious believers who disagree with the practice.

The Supreme Court and the courts should be something people keep in mind for the November elections. They, like Congress, are too pro-Trump.

ETA: I will add updates on Jamaal Howard's execution, scheduled for 10/7 in Texas.

He murdered a woman in 2000 during an attempted robbery. Twenty-five years is too long to wait, as Justice Breyer argued, to execute him.

His lawyers are using the recent botched execution to argue Texas -- which has a much better record -- cannot be trusted. Good luck with that. 

Also, a final appeal tries to obtain another bite of the apple to claim he is too intellectually disabled to be executed. Jackson dissented without opinion. 

Meanwhile, Christa Pike is conscious after surviving an execution attempt and is, let's say, out of sorts. 

Two More Executions (Well, One)

I continue to agree with Justice Breyer (and Ginsburg and Stevens) that there are constitutional problems with executing people decades after the trial. 

No justice has agreed with them since. Thus, two more people were executed after thirty years, without any red flags being raised. 

Curtis Wilkie Beasley, 77, is scheduled for execution on Sept. 29 for the 1995 murder of a Polk County woman who was bludgeoned with a hammer in her home.

In 1998, a jury voted 10-2 to recommend Beasley die for the death of 62-year-old Carolyn Monfort of Dundee after he had been found guilty on charges of first-degree murder, robbery, and grand theft in February of that year.

It is becoming a standard practice. Florida executes old men for horrible crimes occurring decades ago. 

Other problems may exist (e.g., non-unanimous jury recommendation). The final appeals raise multiple claims. The time lag, however, stands out most. 

A major argument is that he is a decrepit old man who is not fit to be executed. I consider these types of executions a form of de facto euthanasia. 

Christa Pike, aged 50, is scheduled to be executed in Tennessee, USA, on September 30, 2026. She was convicted in 1996 of a 1995 murder committed when she was 18, barely out of a childhood in which she endured rape, sexual and physical violence, abuse, and neglect. The state failed to protect her as a child despite having knowledge of what she was facing. Her court-appointed lawyers then failed her at her trial, presenting little of the mitigating evidence of this abuse or its psychological consequences.

Tennessee last executed a woman in 1819. An execution of a woman is always atypical. The crime here was horrible.

Pike had accused Colleen of insulting her and trying to steal her boyfriend. Two other residents at the camp later testified that Pike had bragged about the murder before and after, and showed them a piece of Colleen's skull.

She did not act alone in the "torturing and murdering" of the teen. A co-defendant reportedly was the one truly into the Satanic rituals practiced during the crime. Her defense was also suspect, including failure to provide adequate testimony about her problems. 

A very troubled eighteen-year-old committed a heinous crime. She has been in prison for thirty years. Is that not enough punishment? Not according to Tennessee. She failed the death penalty lottery.

A coalition against sexual abuse submitted a striking amicus brief arguing that her past sexual trauma would lead to PTSD while she was being executed. She would effectively feel like she was being raped. 

The justices rejected all the final appeals without comment. I don't like that as a general rule. 

It is a tad worse here. Something worse happened the next day. The court of appeals (2-1) temporarily stayed the execution. The Supreme Court overturned the stay, with Sotomayor dissenting for the liberals.

Two appellate courts splitting on the issue shows room for debate. The Supreme Court's intervention allowed someone to die. The orders yesterday kept the status quo, though one allegation was glaring enough to warrant a response. 

I understand the concern that the court of appeals wrongly stopped things at the last minute. It has been thirty years, and now there is more delay.

I wasn't sure if it made the right call. New evidence might be present, but was it really enough? There was also a procedural debate over the claim. 

Once the court of appeals stayed the execution, the presumption favors the status quo. Lifting the stay would result in someone's death. (Or so it seemed.) The majority should have explained why reversal was warranted. 

The execution was also botched. Media witnesses explained, in brutal detail, how things went down. She was alive over an hour after the execution drugs were administered. I wonder about executions in other states. Were there more problems than apparent? 

They were left in the dark about what exactly happened, including whether she was still alive. 

"No prison officials were outside to tell the media what was happening as the first responders arrived. No time of death has been publicly provided."

A curtain was repeatedly drawn to hide what was going on in the execution chamber. Later, a court reported that the government provided medical attention. Anyway, I guess her concerns about the use of lethal injection weren't totally off base. 

It was not the first botched execution this year. The governor announced that officials will suspend the other execution planned this year while they investigate. 

Some people have denounced capital punishment as "barbarism" tonight. Often, it goes down without looking as horrible. But maybe that is how barbarism works. It seems okay, then they rub in how bad it is. 

==

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court prepared for the new term. A "long conference" examined a bunch of pending appeals, mostly to dispose of them.

Alito recused himself in a major climate dispute. There was some back-and-forth involved. 

Alito (more) and Roberts are the only active justices with individual stocks, which means Alito has to recuse more often. Maybe there is a better way?

Shadow Docket Time

SCOTUS is busy doing many things. 

But this is worthy of a stand-alone entry. Chris Geidner has the details. He also summarizes:

SCOTUS allows the Trump admin to restart third-country removals under a policy found by lower courts to violate federal law. The Democratic appointees dissent.

The deportations will be OK'ed at least through the next several months, with SCOTUS agreeing to hear the case in December.

Over the course of the second Trump administration, one study estimates that more than 25,000 people have been deported since 2025 using this process.

The liberals dissented from the granting of the stay. Without comment. The oral argument will be in December. The final opinion will be later. Why not continue the stay until then? 

The Supreme Court provides some questions for briefing, including a catch-all regarding any question the government deems appropriate. Steve Vladeck notes that he never saw that before. 

The removals include sending people to countries for which they have no previous connection. Someone from Latin America, for instance, can be sent to East Africa. The whole thing is simply horrible. 

They might want to call this an "emergency docket" case, but the order has no explanation. It merely provides instructions. It is a shadow docket decision. 

Odds and Ends

I found the graphic novel form of To Kill A Mockingbird well done. I forgot a few plot tidbits. 

The Mets had a better second half, especially since the trading deadline, than expected. Various minor league pitchers and/or pitchers back from injury did well. They still, with a good Nationals finish (the team had gone into a swoon), wound up in last place. 

A few races went down to the wire. White Sox will at least be a Wild Card. Congrats. Rooting for you!

Non-Citizen on Voting Rolls Follies

I discussed a story about the rapidly decreasing number of supposed noncitizens on voting rolls. Voting rolls, not actually voting. 

Coincidentally, the Supreme Court handed down a related order. I updated the piece. The limited immediate reach makes the opinion less problematic (for now), but also makes it even less necessary for SCOTUS (as Jackson argues) to intervene. 

ETA: vs. the second case, where they said: "We meant it, morons." 

Two Films

Tubi continues to provide interesting films.

Paperback Hero is a charming Australian romantic comedy with Hugh Jackman having a chance to keep his accent. He's a truck driver who wrote a romance novel, which leads to complications. Nothing surprising, just overall enjoyable.

The Pastor and the Pro is weirder. A young pastor-in-training decides to hire a prostitute, whom he likes, to be his escort to a church function. The use of Jacob/Leah/Rachel for a romantic triangle is one sign of whimsy. This short film  (under eighty minutes) has some serious ideas and strong performances.

Constitution Day

September 17 was Constitution Day and David Souter's Birthday. Meanwhile, Trump continues to be anti-constitutional, including regarding the Media. Happy Suffrage Day (comments).

More Executions

Stacy Humphreys 

Georgia planned to execute Stacey Humphreys for a double robbery/homicide last December. 

The press (as discussed here) tried to obtain more information about the execution. Open access is important for due process and public education.  

A state court blocked the execution. He might be eligible pursuant to a state law protecting victims of abuse. Net result: the execution warrant ran out.

Jeffery Lee

Alabama planned to execute Jeffery Lee using nitrogen gas. A lower court, not blocked by the Supreme Court this time, held it was unconstitutionally risky. They used lethal injection.

The final appeal challenged Alabama's ability to switch methods. Lee's lawyers argue the state said "nitrogen gas," and they don't have the right to switch now. Lee offered the firing squad as a backup option (one is required) when challenging the nitrogen gas. 

Denied without comment. The liberals pick their spots. The back-and-forth nature of this execution provides some grounds to drop a statement or dissenting opinion. A statement would flag concerns, but not enough to warrant granting a stay of execution and/or a cert. grant. 

Lee was convicted of a double homicide. The jury (7-5) voted to apply a life sentence without parole. The judge overruled it and applied the death penalty.

If we set twenty years as "too long," the murders took place in 2003. OTOH, the Supreme Court has never accepted the "taking too long" approach.  

Here's a good summary. 

LeJames Norman

Norman and a second person (who is scheduled to die later this month) murdered three people in an attempted robbery twenty years ago. 

They were 19 and 20. The constitutional line has been set at 18. Age is still a mitigating factor. 

See also a citation of "chaotic, impoverished, and violent childhoods." Norman also showed remorse and testified against his co-defendant.* 

The final appeal argued that the prosecutor corruptly baited and switched. They used Norman to convict his co-defendant and then badmouthed him, sometimes with lies, during his own trial.

SCOTUS denied it without comment, which is normal enough, though it did take until late afternoon on the day of the execution. He was then executed. 

I'm sure the lawyers raised various other claims over the years. Overall, the best reason not to execute is that there are enough mitigating factors.

Two people under 21 committed a horrible crime and have been in prison longer than they were alive. Execution does not improve the public welfare.

==

* I will update this entry regarding that execution.

ETA: His final appeal alleged incompetent counsel (from a dentist who did lawyering on the side) and racial discrimination in jury selection. 

Denied on execution day without comment. My general rule is that I support some statement in these final appeals, even if the argument is weak.

The evidence appears clear. I would oppose his execution because of the mitigation of youth, maybe his childhood, and on basic principles. 

Mail-In Ballots

Not very verbose, but the Supreme Court (with feeling) held up Trump's attempt to screw over mail-in voting. Kavanaugh concurred while noting the rule change might be okay long-term. Alito (with Thomas) dissented. Vladeck with more. 

The Administration can still cause problems, including pressuring state officials by threatening them with prosecution. 

Schitt's Creek

 

This is/was a beloved show by many different types of people. I didn't really like the first season when I saw it some time back. I watched some mid-series episodes last weekend. 

Enjoyed it more. I think the show might have the most charm when the characters settle in and become more part of the town. Maybe a re-watch would improve things. 

OTOH, multiple shows kick in later in the series. Newhart, for instance, was not that good until the third season. Night Court too. 

25 Years?

I watched the film Executive Decision in the 1990s.

The film, with a small part for the then Mrs. Trump (Marla Maples), concerned terrorists taking control of an airplane.

The terrorist leader plans to detonate a bomb loaded with the DZ-5 in U.S. airspace. A special ops team, including a civilian terrorist consultant played by Kurt Russell, manages to secretly board the plane. It's an entertaining film, though I don't think it quite sticks the landing in the last reel.

Five years later, I listened to the radio as an on-the-scene reporter tearfully reported that one of the twin towers collapsed. I could see the smoke from midtown Manhattan. A few days later, I passed the church where they were having funerals.

I think one good memorial is the names placed on tiles on the wall in a passageway of the Union Square train station of those who died. Has it been 25 years? 

Oh well.

Florida Executes Daniel Owen Conahan

Daniel Owen Conahan kidnapped, raped, and murdered someone thirty years ago. He might have murdered someone else. I understand sentencing him to death. 

Justice Breyer explained why it is wrong to execute him now. It was a dissenting opinion, though I wish someone on the current Court took up the cause. Conahan's final appeal argued that he deserves additional DNA testing. It was probably correctly denied. 

It might be good policy to supply the testing. What is the harm? Ultimately, the death penalty is wrong, especially if it is held in abeyance for three decades. More executions to come.

SCOTUS Watch: Post Holiday Edition

James Wilson is an interesting guy. I liked the author's book on abolishing the Electoral College. I did not like this one. Charles Pinckney is also interesting. An older book on that guy is almost a monograph or something (it's small). Decent account. 

The Supreme Court didn't block a New York law denying religious exemptions to child vaccine requirements. Alito and Gorsuch, without comment, dissented. Good.

Kavanaugh, by himself, rejected a Republican redistricting lawsuit request. [The Court later also did so.] Limited bit of sanity.

SCOTUS Watch

Trump Ballroom 

I wrote about Monday's order allowing Trump to continue to break the law. I apologize; that is much too vague. It is about the ballroom. 

Roberts and the liberals dissented. Yes. He has done a lot wrong. A few moments don't take him off the hook. But credit where credit is due, and all that.

Court Expansion

House Republicans, who plan to mostly hide out until November, had a message vote against court expansion. More specifically, on an amendment setting the number of justices at nine. 

Two people voted differently than their party, and one is an asterisk. The Republican recently labeled himself an "independent" while still voting with Republicans. 

This sounds like another token way to pretend he is not a Trump bootlicker or something. I don't know why the Democrat voted that way. I won't check. I assume he represents a reddish district. 

It's stupid either way. If you don't like court expansion, which is far from being a thing (one key Democrat said in an interview he is now open to it; okay), don't vote for it. 

The number of justices has changed over time, between 5 and 10 justices. Federalists added a court of appeals, which would have ended circuit riding. The next vacancy would not be filled, resulting in five justices. The law was changed before that happened. 

It is a bad idea to set minutiae in stone in the Constitution. We should allow flexibility. 

I am wary of the 25th Amendment. The concern there is that it was so sensitive; the process for removing a president should be clearly in place. Again, I question if even that was a good idea. It is just too specific. 

Court expansion talk is itself partially a message. If court expansion is even open to the realm of possibility, a lot of other things should be possible. 

The link flags that a key Democrat has now made supportive noises. That's notable. But this seems more a reaction to DSA support of the idea. 

Republicans want to tar Democrats as akin to the most doctrinaire DSA type while the House Speaker pretends not to know most of what Trump is doing. 

Order List

The last scheduled summer order list had the usual housekeeping measures, involving pending cases, rehearings denied, and attorney discipline. Barrett didn't take part (without saying why) in one case. 

The most notable thing, apparently, is what they did not decide. There is a pending case involving New York health workers who were not satisfied with the vaccine exemption process. 

Justices Gorsuch (who wrote one or more opinions on it), Alito, and Thomas have been concerned about this issue. The other conservatives avoided it. 

Election Case

The Supreme Court, with only Jackson briefly dissenting (with no heat), granted a stay in an election case. Rick Hasen briefly summarizes. 

Steve Vladeck on Bluesky notes Jackson has the better argument, but that the case isn't too important. That would help explain why Sotomayor and Kagan didn't join. Since Republicans are involved, some knee-jerk replies figured the fix was in.

It is good that the justices deigned to explain themselves. They are doing that more lately.

ETA: Steve Vladeck's Monday Substack informs me that the Supreme Court also released the schedule for December oral arguments. Two cases: assault weapons and another trans case.  

Five Years Later ...

Five years ago, Dobbs was foreshadowed when the Supreme Court (short unsigned opinion) left in place a six-week abortion ban. Roberts and the liberals, in varying degrees, dissented. 

Florida Executes/Euthanizes Harold Gene Lucas

Fifty years ago. Lucas, then 24, murdered his former girlfriend, then 16, and wounded two of her friends.

Florida has gotten around to executing him for the crime, much too late (see, Breyer, dissenting). He had no final appeal, old and tired. 

The whole thing was extended because of multiple appeals, flagging procedural concerns. It was a crime of passion. Not a "worst of the worst" case. It warranted a long prison sentence. 

Sheena

 

Sheena has been on film and television in various forms. 

There was a 1950s series and a 1980s film (both silly, and the film is a tad bit sexist). MeTV+ airs one series early Sunday. Nice on the eyes (Baywatch babe). Not bad as somewhat silly entertainment. 

Tubi has all three. These days, such white Tarzan figures are a bit outdated. The 2000 version could get pretty violent.