CourtArtist.com

Courtartist.com has Moved

The blog courtartist.com has moved. Please follow this link to the new and improved courtartist.

 

Big Wins For Gay Marriage

    On the last day of the its term the Supreme Court today handed twin victories to the cause of marriage equality.
    If there was an empty seat in the courtroom I couldn't see it.

 

Justice Kennedy had the first opinion, U.S. v Windsor, in which the Court found the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.

    And of course Justice Scalia read a lenghty dissent.

    The second victory for same-sex marriage was by default in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts where the Court found that the petitioners in support of California's Proposition 8 lacked standing, thereby allowing the lower court's ruling to stand.

    So much will be written about these decisions in the next few days that I won't bother linking to any one. 

 

Fisher Fails to Finish 'Firmative Action

    On the first day of what promises to be a steamy week in Washington, at least outside the Supreme Court building, the Court announced its opinion in a long awaited affirmative action case, Fisher v. University of Texas.
    When the case was argued back in October it appeared that the University's use of race as an admissions factor might be struck down.
Instead, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy, the Court said such programs must meet the test of "strict scrutiny" as well as being "narrowly tailored".
    Surprisingly, for a case argued at the beginning of the term, there was but one dissenter in the 7-1 decision (Justice Kagan took no part), Justice Ginsburg.

    "The Court rightly declines to cast off the equal protection framework ...", writes Ginsburg. "Yet it stops short of reaching the conclusion that (it) warrants." 

    Justice Alito took a sip from his coffee cup.

DNA Sampling No Different Than Fingerprinting

    In an opinion delivered by Justice Kennedy today the Supreme Court said that taking a DNA sample from a suspect is the same as fingerprinting someone upon arrest, and that the purpose is indentification of the suspect.

    “When officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and they bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee’s DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment," said Justice Kennedy.

    "That assertion taxes the credulity of the credulous," said Justice Scalia in a dissent delivered from the bench. "In approving that suspicionless search, the Court has cast aside a bedrock rule of our Fourth Amendment ..."

    The case is Maryland v. King

Supreme Court Revisits Affirmative Action

Nine years after deciding that race, though not quotas, could be considered in college admissions a new, somewhat more conservative Supreme Court is reconsidering affirmative action. The case against the University of Texas was brought by Abigail Fisher, a Texas high school student who says she was denied admission because of her race.

The first question for Fisher's attorney, Bert W. Rein, came from Justice Ginsburg, who along with Justices Breyer and Sotomayor, is expected to uphold the Court's earlier position on affirmative action in college admissions. Justice Kagan, whose empty chair can be seen on the right, is not taking part in the case.

The more conservative members of the Court, who had been mostly silent during Rein's argument, sprang into active questioning as Gregory Garre took the lectern to defend the university's program.

Justice Alito, a foe of affirmative action plans who replaced Justice O'Connor, the author of the Court's earlier opinon in Grutter v. Bollinger, asked Garre, "I thought that the whole purpose of affirmative action was to help students ...from underpriviledged backgrounds, ..." "But you say ...it doesn't admit enough African Americans and Hispanics ...from priviledged backgrounds."

Replied Garre, "Because, Your Honor, our point is that we want minorities from different backgrounds"

Justice Kennedy, as usual the swing vote on which the case hinges, said, "So what you're saying is that what counts is race above all."

The term "critical mass", refering to the proportion of minorities in the student body, was bandied back and forth with both Garre and Solicitor General Verrilli trying to avoid making it sound like a number.

Justice Scalia to General Verrilli, "So we should stop calling it mass."

Verrilli, "I agree."

Scalia, "Call it a cloud or something like that."

 

SCOTUSblog's Amy Howe has the Plain English summary here.

The Supreme Court's Health Care Opinion

My sketches from the announcement of the Court's opinion, and dissents, on the Affordable Care Act. 

As they took their seats Justice Breyer was smiling; Sotomayor looked glum.

Justice Scalia was actually sitting as far back from Roberts as possible. Forgive the artistic license, but I wanted to get his expression in the frame.

Announcing the Court's Opinion on Arizona Immigration Law

Sketches of the Supreme Court announcing its opinion in Arizona v. U.S. The Court upheld in part and struck down in part Arizona's law, SB 1070, aimed at curtailing illegal immigration. Justice Kennedy wrote for the majority.....

.....and Justice Scalia dissented.
 

The Tucson Citizen has the story here.