SCOTUS Watch: End of Term Orders Again

Also: Some talk about likely SCOTUS picks including McConnell worried about complications with one or the other senator.  Shall see since the rose is supposed to be given tomorrow night.

Breyer aptly warned that the decision threatened other consumer protection provisions: as one example, he cited a California law requiring hospitals to inform new parents about child safety seats. And just two days later the Court told the federal appeals court in California that NIFLA might be grounds for striking down a local ordinance requiring cell phone providers to warn users that keeping a cell phone in a pocket might result in radiation exposure in excess of federal guidelines.

Breyer in a recent interview also recommended Adam Winkler's We the Corporations book. The interesting reference in today's weekly Jost on Justice blog post was one I missed the first time, part of the summary dispositions of the end of the term order.  See also, this article on "post-truth" speech regulation.

Various cases were sent back to re-examine per cases decided this term. This one involved a cell phone warning passed by California, one of many such things. Generally, disclosures and disclaimers, even those involving campaign speech, have been upheld.  But, the crisis pregnancy ruling suggests not so fast. This is part of the "weaponizing of the First Amendment" that lead to such a strong dissents (see also, Janus).  There also was another case in the Scalia interregnum involving credit cards that was sent back but it was a sort of faux minimalism since Roberts' majority still said there was an important free speech interest at issue.  When examining the next justice,* perhaps something to think about.

Another summary order of some interest was a loss for unions.  Another involved a lower court that went the other way regarding cell phone data:

Cell phones—once figments of science fiction—now live in most Americans’ pockets and purses. These devices are double-edged swords, increasing convenience at the expense of privacy. Each time they make or receive calls, they leave a trail of digital crumbs known as historical cell-site location information (CSLI)—business records kept by service providers identifying which cell towers routed which communications.

There are a lot of little things in these orders that have some interesting footnotes, such as cases not taken or technical things including things accepted under seal. Sometimes, there are things that make me go "hmm."  There also are orders like this that suggest the potential breadth of opinions.

===

* I don't call Trump by the same moniker as President Obama or Gorsuch by the same title as Justice Kagan.  For various reasons, including taint of the process, neither deserve the title, though less use my bit of protest in the latter case.  The upcoming nominee is part of a corrupt process, including someone under investigation choosing a person key to various disputes involving him personally, but (guardedly) not thinking it is so tainted that "justice" is not warranted.  But, I might change my mind.