Cases And Controversies

For the first time since Chief Justice John Roberts took the helm in 2005, the Supreme Court is going into overtime—that is, going beyond the final week in June to issue all of its decisions in argued cases. The justices were able to clear their decks of five cases this week, in which the chief justice took a starring role. From his swing vote in a Louisiana abortion case to his vote in favor of a unitary executive, Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down those cases and the chief's pivotal role in this episode of our podcast, Cases & Controversies. And later in the episode, Hogan Lovells' Cate Stetson joins the podcast to discuss Roberts' not-so-surprising votes and what it means for the future of the court.

The Supreme Court issued just two opinions this week heading into the final days of June, with 13 argued cases still undecided as we near what is usually the end of the term. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down those two divided decisions, on SEC enforcement and the rights of immigrants facing expedited removal. They also talk about what the rest of the term looks like, including how the Roberts Court will likely break new ground by not issuing its final decisions until July. Also, Bloomberg Law’s judiciary reporter, Madison Alder, joins the podcast to discuss President Trump’s twin milestones this week: appointing his 200th federal judge while failing to put any Black judges on the appeals courts.

It was a historic week for the Supreme Court as the justices split among themselves while delivering victories for LGBT and immigrant rights, not to mention major defeats for the Trump administration. Justice Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts faced backlash from Republicans for siding with Democratic appointees in the closely-watched employment discrimination and DACA disputes, both of which will have immediate impacts for millions of Americans. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down these momentous decisions, joined by guests Nicole Saharsky of Mayer Brown and Omar Gonzalez-Pagan of Lambda Legal, who filed briefs in the LGBT discrimination cases. The hosts also highlight some important appeals the high court chose not to take up, as well as some notable instances of tempers flaring in dissent.

With just one opinion and one grant coming out of the Supreme Court this week, Bloomberg Law takes a step back to look at how the term has shaped up and what to expect in the final weeks. The court's newest member, Brett Kavanaugh, has quickly become the median justice. He's the only one to be in the majority in 100% of the argued cases that he's participated in this term. Chief Justice John Roberts is close behind. Kavanaugh also has authored three of the court's six split decisions that were decided by just one vote. Such contentious issues typically get assigned to more senior justices. All that's likely to change with the end of the term fast approaching and the court handing down its most consequential decisions. Look for insight on how things might change in this latest episode of Cases and Controversies with Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin.

The Supreme Court issued five opinions in a range of cases on June 1, including the much-anticipated decision over the fate of Puerto Rico’s financial oversight and management board. This week’s Cases and Controversies episode breaks down that ruling as well as decisions on immigration, arbitration, and more. Hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin also look at what’s ahead and note that the term’s most contentious opinions could come soon. Among the 20 cases remaining are ones on discrimination protections for LGBT workers and the Obama-era DACA program that shields hundreds of thousands of immigrants from deportation. The hosts also update the situation on pending petitions over qualified immunity, which was discussed in the May 22 episode. The legal doctrine that shields law enforcement from liability, even in the face of egregious allegations of civil rights violations, is taking on new significance following George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police.

It's time for the justices to buckle down, with approximately two dozen cases outstanding and the end of the term approaching. Lyle Denniston has covered the court for nearly six decades, and he joins Cases and Controversies to review the big pending cases and the pandemic's implications for the future of the Supreme Court. He'll also disclose what he's been up to during his third shot at "retirement." Hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin will also get listeners up to date with the latest filings and court happenings. These include two likely new cases and emergency requests related to the pandemic.

Supreme Court justices are hammering out their final opinions of the term, fielding emergency litigation, and contemplating which new cases to add to their docket for next term. The latest Cases and Controversies episode highlights an issue that’s been piling up on the high court’s docket: qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that shields law enforcement from liability even after the most egregious allegations of civil rights violations. The Cato Institute’s Jay Schweikert has been fighting against the doctrine at the court and he joins hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to explain why, in his view, it puts plaintiffs in a hopeless “Catch-22" when trying to vindicate their rights, and why the time has come for the justices to take another look at immunity. The hosts also discuss a variety of high court action, including litigation over the release of the full Mueller Report, as well as the court’s most recent opinion, in a suit over the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa more than two decades ago. P

The Supreme Court finished up its first livestreamed arguments with blockbuster cases involving subpoenas for the president's financial information and so-called "rogue" members of the electoral college. Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin discuss the historic sitting, from an all-female lineup to taciturn Justice Clarence Thomas's multiplicity of questions to, once again, The Flush. And attorney Jason Harrow, who made his high court debut remotely, joins to chat about his case and his unusual argument experience. Listen to find out why Harrow really should have brushed up on his Tolkien before calling in to SCOTUS.

Supreme Court justices survived their first week of livestreamed arguments mostly unscathed, and now they’re ready to bring it home with the final week of phone arguments in this special May session. Headlining this upcoming week are the May 12 arguments over congressional and prosecutorial efforts to get President Trump’s private financial records from third-party banks and accounting firms. In another dispute with 2020 presidential election implications, the justices will hear arguments May 13 over whether "faithless" Electoral College electors’ can vote their own way. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin preview those highly anticipated disputes, as well as back-to-back arguments May 11 over American Indian reservation status and religious employers’ First Amendment claims. The hosts also highlight some of the more noteworthy moments from the high court’s historic first week on the phone.

The Supreme Court is going to kick off its historic May argument sitting by hearing four cases the week of May 4. Two female advocates will kick off the first one, which is being argued over by phone and livestreamed to the public—both a first for the famously technophobic court. Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin breakdown that case as well as the three others being argued during the week, from IP to free speech to religious freedom. And they'll highlight some of the technical issues facing the justices and the advocates.

The Supreme Court issued six opinions the week of April 20, including one that got at the issue of precedent. It's a hot topic for court watchers, especially with an abortion rights case from Louisiana still to be decided. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin unpack the ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana. It was a stare decisis throwdown in which Justice Elena Kagan joined some of her Republican-appointed colleagues in dissent, prompting speculation about why she did so. The hosts also recap the other opinions that included interesting vote lineups among the justices. And Kimberly and Jordan speak with Riyaz Kanji, who next month will argue for his clients, the Creek Nation, in a telephonic oral argument in the case of McGirt v. Oklahoma. That dispute calls into question the status of tribal reservations in the eastern half of the Sooner state. Kanji explains why he believes claims by Oklahoma officials of a crisis if the justices side with the Creek Nation are overblown.

The Supreme Court continued to adapt to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, allowing media outlets to live-stream arguments for the first time in its 230-year history. In another first, the court also said it will hear those arguments over the phone. Among the case to be argued is the subpoena fight for President Trump's financial records, which will be argued May 12. Former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal joins Cases and Controversies' hosts Jordan Rubin and Kimberly Robinson to put the court's moves in perspective. "This is an extraordinary thing," Katyal explains. Watch Justice Breyer's census PSA here.

The Supreme Court’s first coronavirus-related ruling sparked a contentious 5-4 split, with the high court’s five Republican-appointed justices siding with Republicans over dissent form the four Democratic-appointees who sided with Democrats. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down the heated dispute and all of the latest Supreme Court news, coronavirus-related and otherwise. They’re joined by Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt (R), whose office’s win in a recent Fourth Amendment case marked a clean sweep of all three of the state’s cases argued at the high court this term. Schmidt talks to the hosts about all three disputes, his oral argument preparation, how coronavirus is impacting both the high court and his home state, and what might be the next Kansas dispute to come to the court.

U.S. Supreme Court justices worked for the second straight week without taking the bench. But this time, there was a technological hitch. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin recap the snafu and how the coronavirus is changing the way the justices themselves stay in shape. They’re joined by the lawyer who won the court’s latest decision, SCOTUSblog’s Tom Goldstein. The Goldstein & Russell partner breaks down the implications of the maritime decision in CITGO v. Frescati, whose issuance was delayed by problems with the court’s website. He also talks about how the justices might handle, or not handle, the spring arguments in this era of social distancing. Kimberly and Jordan also preview a new case that the court will hear next term involving mistaken identity and suing law enforcement. Producer: David Schultz.

The U.S. Supreme Court building is closed to the public and the March arguments are postponed indefinitely. But, as they say, the show must go on. The court issued four opinions Monday March 23, including a closely watched racial discrimination case that could make it harder to bring such suits. Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin also give an update on the latest coronavirus news out of the high court.

The U.S. Supreme Court's two-week argument sitting scheduled for March 23 is postponed indefinitely over the coronavirus threat. But the announcement leaves more questions than answers. Bloomberg Law's Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin break down the impact of the pandemic on the court's business and what cases are up in the air. Supreme Court watchdog Gabe Roth of Fix the Court highlights routes the justices could take if the outbreak causes further delay. And with courts around the country facing similar questions, Bloomberg Law's Madison Alder explains what lower federal courts are doing to keep their doors open—electronically, if needed.

Investigations into President Donald Trump will be front and center at the U.S. Supreme Court on March 31, when the justices are scheduled to hear arguments over whether Congressional committees and Manhattan prosecutors can get their hands on the president’s financial records—including his tax returns. The much-anticipated dispute comes to the high court as coronavirus concerns sweep the nation, prompting uncertainty over how the notoriously old-fashioned institution—which doesn’t livestream arguments and has multiple members in their 80s—will handle the proceedings. On March 12, the court closed to the public until further notice “out of concern for the health and safety of the public and Supreme Court employees.” However, the building “will remain open for official business,” the court added. It’s unclear at this point whether health concerns will affect arguments scheduled for the two-week session starting March 23. For now, anyway, the court’s official business includes oral arguments in multiple cases—T

The Supreme Court justices just wrapped up the latest action-packed argument session which featured heated disputes on the fate of both abortion access and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The two-week session included arguments over challenges to a Louisiana law requiring hospital admitting privileges for abortion providers and a challenge to the structure of the bureau that’s long been a target of conservatives. The Constitutional Accountability Center’s Brian Frazelle, who filed a brief supporting the consumer protection bureau, joins hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin to break down the crucial case that could impact a wide range of government agencies. The hosts also break down the latest 5-4 opinions, court line-standing controversies, and Chief Justice John Roberts’ latest rare public statement defending judicial independence.

This week will be action packed at the Supreme Court, with cases on abortion access and the fate of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau taking center stage. The justices will also hear immigration disputes, continuing a theme of the term where such cases have dominated the docket. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin preview these hot-button arguments in this latest “Sneak Peek” episode.

Could a grandma go to prison for urging her grandson to overstay his visa? The Trump administration says that hypothetical is far-fetched, but it'll be on the justices' minds this week as they take on a law that punishes encouraging illegal immigration at oral argument Feb. 25. It's just one of the disputes up for argument at the U.S. Supreme Court over the next few days, and "Cases and Controversies" hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin are here to get you up to speed on all of them, including an environmental case involving a multi-billion-dollar pipeline, prisoner litigation claims, and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act in a terrorism case. Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin. Producer: David Schultz.