Trial

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Case on Digital Privacy, Reverses Ruling Ordering New Murder Trial

by

The Supreme Court recently made headlines by agreeing to hear a significant case concerning digital privacy, while simultaneously reversing a federal appeals court ruling that mandated a new trial for a Maryland man convicted of attempted murder. This dual action underscores the Court’s active role in addressing pressing legal issues that intersect with contemporary technological advancements and criminal justice. The cases reflect ongoing debates about privacy rights and the implications of federal laws in the digital age. Digital Privacy Case: Salazar v. Paramount Global In the case of Salazar v. Paramount Global, the Supreme Court … Read more

SCOTUS Today for Thursday, January 22

by

As the Supreme Court approaches its four-week winter recess, the legal community remains abuzz with anticipation regarding potential rulings that could emerge before the break. There is a palpable sense of curiosity about whether the upcoming month will yield a lull in activity or if the justices will surprise us with significant decisions. This week has already seen notable arguments and discussions that may shape the legal landscape in the months to come. SCOTUS Quick Hits In the realm of current cases, the Supreme Court’s deliberations have garnered extensive media coverage. One of the most … Read more

The Relist Logjam Finally Breaks

by

The Supreme Court’s recent decisions have sparked significant discussions regarding the relist logjam that has affected several high-profile cases. As the court approaches the end of its October 2025-26 term, the implications of these rulings are becoming clearer. The relist process, where cases are brought back for consideration after initial review, plays a critical role in shaping legal precedents and addressing pressing legal questions. Understanding the Relist Process The relist process is essential for the Supreme Court, allowing justices to reconsider cases that may have previously been set aside. This reconsideration can stem from new … Read more

Justices Clarify Restitution Requirements for Federal Convicts

by

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court addressed the implications of the ex post facto clause in relation to restitution obligations under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA). The case, Ellingburg v. United States, centered on whether the requirement for Holsey Ellingburg to pay restitution could be altered retroactively after the commission of his crimes but before his sentencing. The unanimous opinion, delivered by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, underscored the constitutional protections against retroactive increases in punishment, establishing a clear boundary for federal criminal proceedings. Understanding the Ex Post Facto Clause The ex post facto clause … Read more