This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.


This week, as the U.S. Supreme Court begins its summer recess, Adam Winkler, of UCLA School of Law, will discuss how liberal justices, in what has become a perhaps unexpected trend, helped render a number of pro-business rulings over the past term.

And John Eastman, from Chapman University Fowler School of Law, will walk us through some anticipatory posturing laid out by justices during the term, jurisprudential discursions that, Eastman says, the justices may very well be writing to help bolster their eventual rulings in next term's immigration law battles, among them President Trump's executive order temporary banning travel from certain countries. Eastman will discuss what signals courtwatchers can glean from these various nuances in the court's dicta.

Also, we discuss two state cases drew attention this week, one a divided ruling in the California Supreme Court keeping broad discretion in the hands of judges hearing Prop 36 Three Strikes Reform Act resentencing petitions, and thus rendering resentencing under that Act more elusive, and another a unanimous ruling from Texas questioning whether and to what extent lower courts may be able to narrow the impact of 'Obergefell v. Hodges.'


Brian Cardile

Daily Journal Staff Writer

For reprint rights:

Email for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

If you would like to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, call (213) 229-5558.

Send a letter to the editor: