On Monday evening, Chief Justice John Roberts released his year-end report on the federal judiciary. Amy Howe writes for this blog that the report “focus[ed] on the judiciary’s response to allegations of sexual misconduct in the workplace.” At Law.com, Tony Mauro notes that “[i]t was the second annual report in which Roberts discussed the need […]
On Monday evening, Chief Justice John Roberts released his year-end report on the federal judiciary. Amy Howe writes for this blog that the report “focus[ed] on the judiciary’s response to allegations of sexual misconduct in the workplace.” At Law.com, Tony Mauro notes that “[i]t was the second annual report in which Roberts discussed the need for the judiciary to take steps to end sexual harassment in the workplace and to make it easier for court employees to report improper conduct without running afoul of strict confidentiality rules.” For The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that “[t]he Supreme Court itself isn’t bound by the federal laws and codes of conduct that apply to lower courts,” and “[t]he report gave no indication that the justices were prepared to accept the obligations expected of lower courts.” Bill Mears reports for Fox News that “[w]hat was noteworthy in the 15-page report was a topic Roberts chose not to discuss: the ongoing criticism by President Trump of judges and courts that have ruled against him, especially on his immigration policies.”
Lydia Wheeler reports for The Hill that although the “Supreme Court’s 2018-2019 term got off to a sleepy start, … there are a number of potential blockbusters on the docket for the new year”; she takes “a look at the top five cases to watch.” In an op-ed for Fox News, John Yoo and James Phillips explain why “[t]he year ahead has the potential to be historic for the U.S. Supreme Court.”
- In an op-ed for The Hill, Elliot Mincberg warns that in The American Legion v. American Humanist Association, an establishment clause challenge to a World War I memorial shaped like a cross on public property, “the American Legion’s lawyers and supporters are arguing that the court should upend numerous court decisions and rule that government can legally take action to promote or endorse a specific religion,” which “would effectively turn those who do not believe in that religion into second-class citizens.” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioners in this case.]
- Steven Mazie observes for The Economist that “On the Basis of Sex,” a new movie about the young Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s early career as a women’s-rights litigator, “brings a measure of hope to viewers who cheer the revolution in gender equality the past half-century has wrought.”
We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!