Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Bold Justice: October 1, 2018

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

%%subject%%

Alexander Hamilton may have thought them the least dangerous branch, but we at Ballotpedia think federal courts are the most exciting!

Ballotpedia's Bold Justice

Welcome to the October 1 edition of Bold Justice, Ballotpedia's newsletter about SCOTUS and other judicial happenings around the U.S. This publication goes out the first Monday of the month (with some exceptions). Don't miss any tricks or treats while you're preparing for Halloween! Follow us on Twitter or subscribe to the Daily Brew for the most up-to-date political information.
We #SCOTUS so you don't have to

SCOTUS will begin hearing cases for the term this morning (October 1). As of publication, the court has agreed to hear 42 cases.  In its previous term, SCOTUS heard arguments in 69 cases.
The court is expected to hear six cases during the first week of October. Click the links below to read more about the specifics in each case.

October 1

October 2

October 3

What people are saying about Gundy

The nondelegation doctrine makes its return to the U.S. Supreme Court this term with Gundy v. United States, scheduled to be argued on October 2, 2018. The case involves whether the Constitution allows Congress to empower the U.S. attorney general to apply the Sex Offender Notification and Registration Act (SORNA) retroactively (as was done to defendant Herman Gundy) without providing guidance about how to use that power. Not since 1935 has the Court ruled that a congressional action was unconstitutional on nondelegation grounds.

Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Mark Miller wrote in The Hill that ‘’our Founding Fathers delegated the lawmaking authority to Congress, and then made legislators responsible to the people by allowing the people to vote them in or out of office every two years, according to how Congress abused or properly used its lawmaking power. Congress insulates itself from this accountability by shirking its lawmaking responsibility and handing it off to bureaucrats. The Supreme Court should use the Gundy case to put a stop to this purposeful avoidance of accountability.”

Courts writer for Slate Mark Joseph Stern said many “progressives fear that, once resuscitated, the [nondelegation doctrine] could be used to strike down all manner of economic regulations [...] These days, Congress hands off most regulatory authority to a slew of federal agencies situated in the executive branch. A court concerned about nondelegation could strike down a vast range of liberal legislation under the doctrine. Labor laws and environmental protections would be especially vulnerable, since Congress gives agencies a broad mandate to interpret and implement these measures. If the Supreme Court renders that mandate unconstitutional, federal rules that protect workers’ rights, collective bargaining, clean air, and endangered species would fall.”

The Cato Institute argued in its amicus brief that, “The Vesting Clauses in the Constitution’s first three articles establish a tripartite government of divided authority. While these may overlap at the margins, each branch retains a core set of powers such that it may check and balance the others. To permit delegation from one to another—for purported efficiency gains—undermines that original design. After all, why should Congress deliberate, make judgments, and stand accountable for each determination when it can license the executive to apply purportedly greater wisdom or technocratic expertise?”
A case you oughta know

On September 28, 2018, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-10 along party lines to report Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Senate floor for a vote. The Judiciary Committee held hearings on the nomination of Kavanaugh on September 27. On July 9, President Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. Kavanaugh is currently a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.  

Keep up with Kavanaugh's nomination here.
SCOTUS trivia

SCOTUS hears arguments in Washington, D.C. but this was not always the case. Where did the first meeting of the Supreme Court take place?

  1. Boston, Mass.
  2. New York City, N.Y.
  3. Philadelphia, Pa.
  4. San Antonio, Texas

Choose an answer to find out!
Federal Court action

Confirmations

The United States Senate confirmed eight additional nominees since our last issue.

The U.S. Senate has now confirmed 68 federal judges—41 district court judges, 26 appeals court judges, and one Supreme Court justice (Neil Gorsuch)—nominated by President Donald Trump (R).

New nominations

President Trump did not announce new nominations since our last issue.

He has announced 165 nominations since taking office on January 20, 2017.

Vacancies

The federal judiciary currently has 142 vacancies. Of those 142 vacancies, 70 have no nominee. According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts and other outlets, an additional 25 judges have announced their intention to leave active judicial status during Trump’s first term. There are 72 pending nominations to seats tracked by Ballotpedia’s Federal Vacancy Count.

Committee action

The Senate Judiciary Committee reported 11 nominees out of committee for a full confirmation vote since our last issue.

  • Ryan Douglas Nelson, nominee for the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
     
  • Richard J. Sullivan, nominee for the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.
     
  • Gary Richard Brown, nominee for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
     
  • Stephen R. Clark, Sr., nominee for the United States District Court for the District of Missouri.
     
  • Diane Gujarati, nominee for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
     
  • Eric Ross Komittee, nominee for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
     
  • Rachel P. Kovner,  nominee for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
     
  • Lewis J. Liman, nominee for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
     
  • John L. Sinatra, Jr., nominee for the United States District Court for the Western District of New York.
     
  • Mary Kay Vyskocil, nominee for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
     
  • Joshua Wolson, nominee for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Love judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? We figured you might. Our monthly Federal Vacancy Count, published on the last Wednesday of every month, monitors all the faces, places, and spaces moving in, moving out, and moving on in the federal judiciary.

Need a daily fix? Our Federal Vacancy Warning System has got you covered with continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.

Or, if you prefer, we maintain a list of individuals President Trump has nominated.
Looking ahead

Every month, we at Ballotpedia highlight a federal court you should know more about. Right now, we’re taking a closer look at the United States courts of appeals, or circuit courts. They are the intermediate appellate courts of the U.S. federal courts. There are 13 U.S. courts of appeals.

This month, let's take a bite of the Big Apple and visit the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Second Circuit is located in New York, New York. It has jurisdiction over the United States District Courts in Connecticut, New York, and Vermont.

Congress established the Second Circuit in 1891 with three authorized judgeships. The authorized judgeships gradually increased to 13 by 1984. Seven of the court's 10 current judges were appointed by Democratic presidents. There are three vacancies and one nomination pending.

This court hears arguments at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Courthouse in New York City. The building, constructed between 1932 and 1935, was one of the first federal skyscrapers. The building was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1987.

Since 2007, SCOTUS reversed 37 decisions of 60 cases from the Second Circuit, a rate of 61.7 percent.
Looking ahead

Here’s what we’re looking ahead to this month:

  • SCOTUS is hearing cases the weeks of October 1, 8, and 29.

Join us next week for another edition of Bold Justice, where we’ll preview the cases being argued and provide updates on Kavanaugh’s confirmation.


Why subscribe to Bold Justice?

Stay on top of the whirlwind world of the federal judiciary


Need to stay on top of the whirlwind world of the federal judiciary of the United States?

Join us, counsel, as we lay the foundation for what happened this week in the world of federal courts. Our record will reflect the cases SCOTUS heard, which judges retired, which were nominated, and what important rulings come out of other federal courts. Call us as your next witness and get the most in-depth coverage of federal courts available to your inbox. Subscribe for free today.

Ballotpedia has been providing new areas of coverage, performing in-depth analyses, and developing new tools to help keep our readers in the know since 2006. This is one more resource to keep you informed—one that can be delivered to your inbox once a week.







Archive

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017


Why Bold Justice?

Well, there’s a story behind it, and we’re happy to credit Justice Samuel Alito for the inspiration. Back in October of 2014, Justice Alito joined his fellow Supreme Court Yale Law alumni, Justices Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor, for a panel as part of the law school’s alumni weekend (video below). During the discussion, the moderator asked the audience if they could guess which of the three justices on the panel served as the inspiration for a coffee house to name one of their blends of coffee, Bold Justice. Justice Alito responded, “Obviously, it’s me.”

He went on to tell the story of how, during his days as a Third Circuit judge, his law clerks participated in a Newark, New Jersey, coffee shop’s year-long promotion wherein if customers sampled every blend for one year, the customers could then create and name a blend of coffee. Justice Alito described Bold Justice as a blend that was “designed for about three o’clock in the afternoon if you’re working and you’re starting to fall asleep, if you have this, it will jolt you awake.” A blend of courts and coffee: sounds perfect to us!

v • e
Ballotpedia-Logo-UPDATED-white background.jpg
Ballotpedia coverage by project
Federal
State
Local
Policy
News
Indexes


Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Bold_Justice:_October_1,_2018&oldid=8439170"