Supreme

Supreme Court Rejects Trump Administration’s Request in Immigration Judges Dispute

by

The Supreme Court’s recent decision not to entertain a request from the Trump administration marks a significant moment in the ongoing legal battles surrounding immigration judges. This ruling stems from a broader dispute regarding a policy that limits the ability of immigration judges to engage in speaking activities concerning their roles and the agency that oversees them. The implications of this ruling could have lasting effects on the autonomy of immigration judges and the operational dynamics within the judicial immigration framework. Background of the Dispute At the heart of the dispute is a policy enforced … Read more

Supreme Court Rejects Trump Administration’s Request in Immigration Judges Dispute

by

The Supreme Court’s recent decision to reject a request from the Trump administration marks a significant moment in the ongoing dispute over the independence of immigration judges. This case centers around a policy that restricts immigration judges from discussing their roles publicly, raising critical questions about First Amendment rights and the autonomy of federal employees. The ruling, which has been characterized as a setback for the former administration, underscores the complexities involved in immigration law and the judiciary’s role in addressing these issues. Background of the Dispute The controversy began when the National Association of … 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

What in the world is “zombie precedent”?

by

The term “zombie precedent” is a fascinating concept in legal discourse, particularly in discussions surrounding judicial decisions that have outlived their original context or support. This intriguing phrase was popularized by Justice Antonin Scalia, who likened certain Supreme Court rulings to a ghoul that refuses to stay buried. Specifically, Scalia referred to the infamous Lemon test, which has haunted the court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence for decades. The notion of a zombie precedent encapsulates the idea that some legal precedents can linger, re-emerging in legal arguments despite being largely discredited or abandoned. The Origins of Zombie … Read more