Case

January’s Criminal Law Arguments – and is “Party Presentation” Morphing into a Court-Controlling Rule?

by

As the Supreme Court resumes its activities after the winter recess, significant discussions surrounding criminal law are expected to emerge. The first oral arguments of the year will commence on January 12, with a focus on several notable cases, including the pivotal Wolford v. Lopez, which will be argued later in the month. This case, along with others addressing the rights of trans individuals, could have profound implications for criminal law, highlighting the evolving landscape of judicial interpretation in this area. Overview of Upcoming Cases The Supreme Court will hear a total of nine cases … Read more

Court Announces It Will Hear Case on Gun Rights Among Several Others in February Sitting

by

The Supreme Court is set to engage in significant deliberations regarding gun rights as it prepares to hear a pivotal case in February. This case, along with several others, marks a notable moment for the judiciary as it navigates complex issues surrounding constitutional rights and legislative authority. The implications of these hearings could reverberate through various legal interpretations and societal norms concerning gun ownership and regulation. Overview of the Upcoming Case on Gun Rights One of the most anticipated cases is United States v. Hemani, which centers on the federal government’s prosecution of Ali Danial … Read more

Hamm v. Smith and the Future of Capital Punishment

by

The case of Hamm v. Smith has emerged as a focal point in the ongoing debate surrounding capital punishment and its constitutional implications. This case, which centers on the intellectual disability of Joseph Clifton Smith, raises significant questions about the standards used to determine eligibility for the death penalty. As the legal landscape evolves, the outcomes of such cases may have far-reaching consequences for the future of capital punishment in the United States. The Constitutional Context of Hamm v. Smith At the heart of Hamm v. Smith lies the pivotal issue of whether Smith qualifies … Read more

supreme advocacy: supreme on style, a bit light on substance

by

The documentary titled “Supreme Advocacy: What It Takes to Argue at the Supreme Court,” directed by Andrew Satter, presents a captivating yet somewhat superficial look into the life of a Supreme Court litigator. It follows Roman Martinez, a partner at Latham & Watkins, as he prepares for and argues the case of A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools. This case revolves around the educational accommodations for a teenage girl with severe epilepsy, challenging the existing federal disability discrimination laws. While the film does well in showcasing the advocacy process, it may leave viewers wanting more depth … Read more