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.


participatory / Appellate Practice

Podcast: High Court Highlights

audio

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.'

#113


Related Tests for Appellate practice

participatory/Appellate Practice

Permissible Admission?

Feb. 23, 2018

May a capital defense counsel constitutionally concede his client's guilt, against the client's wishes, where such an admission may be the best chance at avoiding the death penalty? Amicus Albert Giang (Boies Schiller Flexner LLP) argues that the U.S. Supreme Court should answer that question in the negative, and also discusses the tricky line-drawing problems this case presents the high court.

participatory/Appellate Practice

Sugar Wars: A New Hope

Feb. 16, 2018

Can required warning labels on soda advertisements pass First Amendment muster? An en banc 9th Circuit will reconsider the question, after striking such a San Francisco ordinance last year. Our guests Ted Mermin (Public Good Law Center), Ben Winig (ChangeLab Solutions) and Bob Corn-Revere (Davis Wright Tremaine) offer opposing viewpoints.


participatory/Appellate Practice

DACA and the Limits of Reliance

Feb. 9, 2018

Professor Zachary Price (UC Hastings College of the Law) discusses why courts should be wary of overstating the reliance interests that arise from federal non-enforcement regimes, and says that - whatever one's views on the underlying policy - separation of powers concerns recommend reversal of the Northern District's DACA injunction.

participatory/Appellate Practice

An 'Unsettling' Reversal?

Feb. 2, 2018

What does the 9th Circuit's unwinding of a multi-state class action settlement against Hyundai augur for future nationwide suits, or for already concluded claims like the ND CA's $15B Volkswagen settlement? Andrew Trask (McGuire Woods; Class Action Countermeasures) discusses.


general/Appellate Practice

When the 9th Circuit turns to the California Supreme Court

Aug. 25, 2017
By Peder K. Batalden, Felix Shafir

Recent cases suggests that the 9th Circuit might be applying a less stringent standard for when it feels obliged to certify a question about California law to the state high court

participatory/Appellate Practice

Evolving First and Second Amendments

Jul. 28, 2017
By David Kopel, Paul Alan Levy

Paul Levy (Public Citizen) says the 1DCA should have placed a higher burden on defamation plaintiffs seeking identities of anonymous online reviewers in 'ZL Technologies v. Doe'; David Kopel unpacks a D.C. Circuit gun ruling striking down 'good cause' requirements for public carry permits not unlike those approved of recently by the 9th Circuit


participatory/Appellate Practice

Arcane Clauses Employed

Jul. 21, 2017
By Zachary Clopton, Sophia Lakin, Theresa Lee

Guests discuss two lesser-known pieces of federal law gaining prominence in recent suits against the current administration; Professor Zachary Clopton (Cornell Law) addresses the threshold inquiry of whether Emoluments Clause questions are justiciable, and Sophia Lakin and Theresa Lee (ACLU) discuss their Federal Advisory Committee Act claims just filed against President Trump's Committee on Election Integrity