Replies

I can't remember at the moment what's coming up, but I'm pretty sure there are some votes that conservatives are very interested in.

Besides forward looking, the "cases of interest" includes those cases that O'Connor has heard, but where opinions have not been handed down.

Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: October 2005
Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: November 2005
Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: December 2005
Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: January 2006

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England et al
New Hampshire Parental Notification Statute (1st Cir found statute unconstitutional)
Oral Argument Scheduled for November 30, 2005

If the Court agrees with New Hampshire, then states will not have to provide explicit health exceptions in their abortion laws. Further, New Hampshire's death exception will stand in its current state, providing for criminal liability where a physician acts at least negligently in performing an abortion without notification.
liibulletin: Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of N. New England

Gonzales et al. v. Oregon et al.
Whether Controlled Substances Act plays in assisted suicide
Oral Argument (transcript linked) was held on October 5, 2005

Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc. dba ConAgra Refrigerated Foods
To what extent an appeals court may review sufficiency of evidence supporting a civil verdict where the losing party moved for a judgement as a matter of law, below.
Oral Argument Scheduled for November 2, 2005

Caught my eye based on my opinion that the Sciavo case illuminates a procedural weakness in the Civil Law system, where the remedy requested is death. To the extent upper courts are hamstrung to the finding of facts below, errors in fact finding below can have the consequence of death against the patient's wishes, based on error below with no practical ability to reverse. The Uniterm case is not pertinent because the appellant moved for a decsion below on the grounds that "even if the facts are found as stated by the opposing party, I should win as a matter of law." The better argument in Schiavo is "the fact below [TS wants to die] was wrongly found and because the stakes are life and death, Appeals Courts should modify the standard of review."

There are quite a few 4^th Amendment cases in the October-January window. I still haven't found a source that provides a concise summary of the cases and questions presented, where the list is close to being in chronological order.