Selective and vindictive prosecution

ScotusCrim is a recurring series by Rory Little focusing on intersections between the Supreme Court and criminal law. Please note that the views of outside contributors do not reflect the official opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff. The recent federal indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York […]

Read More

Asked and answered

Nuts and Bolts is a recurring series by Stephen Wermiel providing insights into the mechanics of how the Supreme Court works. Every term in recent years, the Supreme Court has agreed to decide roughly 60 cases by receiving briefs, hearing arguments, and answering the questions posed in petitions by the […]

Read More

SCOTUStoday for Friday, October 17

Wednesday’s argument in Louisiana v. Callais lasted nearly two-and-a-half hours, long enough that some justices mentioned being “tired” or having a “long day” during the following argument in Case v. Montana. And although two-and-a-half hours is long compared to most modern argument sessions, it’s nothing compared to oral arguments in […]

Read More

Court mulls tricky issues raised in habeas case

On Tuesday, the justices heard argument in Bowe v. United States, involving a complex (and confusing) area of law: habeas, which allows people confined by the government to challenge the grounds for their detention. Michael Bowe, a federal criminal defendant, seeks to challenge his firearm conviction through a successive habeas […]

Read More

SCOTUStoday for Thursday, October 16

You’ve likely heard of the debate over how to pronounce GIF – gif like the start of “gift” or jif like the peanut butter brand? – but what about the one over Gingles? Wednesday’s argument in Louisiana v. Callais was peppered with contentious references to Gingles factors, which are used […]

Read More

Controlled substances and courtroom candor

The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available here. It’s only week two of the Supreme Court’s new term and already we’re off to the races. As I kinda-sorta predicted, the court granted review in […]

Read More

Justices debate whether restitution imposed on convicts is criminal, civil, or perhaps a little of both

Tuesday’s argument in Ellingburg v. United States turned on whether the ex post facto clause of the Constitution applies to the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act. That clause bars imposing criminal punishments based on statutes not in force when the crime occurred. Because the MVRA was adopted after Holsey Ellingburg’s offense, […]

Read More