SCOTUS Odds and Ends

There is another scheduled summer order list later in the month. Meanwhile, as seen with the execution-related order this week, the justices have a few matters to address.

The Supreme Court, after Gorsuch extended the so-called administrative stay (holding up temporarily to allow the matter to be considered) until today, let stand a lower court order that bars the city of Tulsa from enforcing municipal ordinances against Native Americans.  It's an old case with very unclear reach since there exists an agreement between local authorities and the tribes.  No special action is needed now.

Kavanaugh (with Alito) added  a brief statement that Steve Vladeck translated as "we’re not going to freeze the Tenth Circuit’s mandate because we don’t think Tulsa really needs us to, but boy are we interested in this case if and when it’s gone through full proceedings in the lower courts.” 

[Speaking about Alito, Kagan at a judicial conference took a different take on ethical regulations.  She basically said Congress has some power to regulate though she carefully didn't say too much on how far they can go.]

An order also was handed down agreeing to the solicitor general's request regarding handling an immigration dispute.  

The "ghost gun" case that Alito put on hold until today appears to have some interest since they gave themselves more time.  We will see how things go next Tuesday.  The assumption is someone will write a dissent, perhaps a bit more substantive than the brief statement from K.  

==

I also read a book, basically a collection of documents, related to The Nürnberg Case (aka the Nuremberg Case) as presented by Robert Jackson, the chief prosecutor.  

The book has a short introduction from Jackson but otherwise, he personally does not provide commentary.  It has his introduction and closing remarks, excerpts from cross-examinations (some felt he did not do a great job with Goering), and a defense of the tribunal overall.  It also has the rules for the tribunal, including that the tribunal's own legitimacy is not open to debate.  A bit tricky that.  

One thing that caught my eye was his statement that Nazi Germany suspended various protections of privacy, such as over the mail.  Providing the Fuhrer total control is also cited.  And, it is argued that justice as well as various existing rules (including a treaty that banned aggressive war) justified the Nuremberg tribunal.  Some, including Robert Taft (who ran for president in 1952 and was cited in JFK's Profiles in Courage) doubted its legitimacy, including arguing ex post facto law.  

Three people were found not guilty, the Soviets wanted everyone found guilty.  Jackson was particularly upset a banker was found not guilty and included a part of his interrogation among the documents.  Jackson seemed particularly upset that he went with the winds, supporting the government and then not supporting them.  Any claims of principle were dubious.  

==

I provide a few thoughts about opinion page limits here.