Jul. 7, 2017
Podcast: High Court Highlights
How a split California Supreme Court leaves uncertainty about Prop 36 resentencing discretion, and a unanimous Texas high court queries the 'constellation of benefits' guaranteed same-sex marriages by 'Obergefell;' plus, commentary on a liberal-justice-driven pro-business SCOTUS term, and what dicta nuances foretell for next term's immigration battles
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.'