SCOTUS Watch: Order List

The recent practice this term was for the Supreme Court to show after the weekly conference (or at least by Friday) on their calendar if there was going to be opinions the next week.

So, especially with the working term (let's say; the term itself officially ends when the next one begins in October) usually over at the end of June, people looked for when one or more opinion days (there being five opinions and never that many handed down in one day this term) would come.  Is Kavanaugh in charge of the calendar?  (Inside joke)

But, we never did get notice of opinion days last Friday.  No error: Monday morning brought with it only a longer than usual order list.  We have two per curiams, one regarding qualified immunity and the other the procedural rules in a regulatory taking case.  Sotomayor found another criminal case she flags as problematic.  And, Thomas thinks the medicinal marijuana case is even more wrong-minded given recent developments.  

See more here on the criminal justice cases.  As I note there, constitutionally, I do not think the federal government is acting wrongly as a matter of Commerce Clause power and the like on marijuana. On policy, I think states very well should have discretion, and marijuana as a matter of federal should simply be legal for consenting adults.  Constitutional principles factor in there.  But, it is not something the courts should get involved in to the degree of striking down current policy as a whole.  I put aside certain narrower questions such as medical advice etc.

Alito dissented for the High Federalists on one that to some degree loosened qualified immunity though it was technically a narrower procedural issue. QI continues to be something Court watchers are focused on since it is seen as an excessive means to have wrongdoers avoid just desserts.  As a comment suggests, we know that three dissented, but "officially" (Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Robinson recently refused to go along with this) that is all.  Another might have done silently.  

The Supreme Court took a case involving signage (a First Amendment issue that split the Kagan Court various ways) and another immigration case.  It did not (with Alito and Thomas dissenting without comment) take the trans student case (the actual person involved no longer a student for a while now).  So, after years of litigation, that appears to be done.  

I think there is little reason why SCOTUS couldn't tell us the end of last week what opinion days would be scheduled this week.  It isn't earth shattering or anything, but along with not providing audio of opinion announcements and references to justices' public appearances that can be accessed other places (such as a major Biden lecture), it seems a bit of needless arrogance on their part.  (On the latter, see Amy Howe's testimony below.)  

As of early afternoon, no update on next opinion day.  To be cont. 

[For whatever reason, it took until after 5PM at least, but we were informed that we will have an Opinion day tomorrow.  Not the end of the term -- again, not the TOTAL end, which is in early October.] 

===

I might say more later, but to preview it, we will have the first substantive public meeting of the presidential commission on the Supreme Court on Wednesday.   I am hopeful this will be an educational process that will in some small way at least influence how things will go forward.  A podcast at High School SCOTUS on the cheerleader case had the teen moderator say basically none of her classmates knew about the case.  

As a general manner, that can be said about the public's understanding on Court matters.  There is general anger and passion (well earned) regarding how Republicans screwed over SCOTUS with the Trump nominations, demands for expanding the Court, or at least term limits.  But, there is a lot involved here, and a lot of ignorance.  

Hopefully, this commission will help, and Wednesday brings forth various testimony that informs. For those interested, there already is a lot of written testimony from various parties, including Amy Howe (SCOTUSBlog) and Kim Scheppele (comparing our constitutional system to other nations).  Maya Sen and others also write things that amount to support for term limits.  This is just a sampling.  Hopefully, there is a way written report to be released that summarizes all these interesting perspectives.