Posted on 02/21/2025 6:44:40 AM PST by CFW
The Supreme Court will be issuing Opinions from the October 2024 term this morning at 10:00 a.m.
Attorneys at scotusblog will be live blogging the opinions at the link below and we will be following along:
Below is a link to the cases before the court this term:
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
As usual there may be only one boring Opinion released or there may be two or three of great interest. It's like a box of chocolates, we just never know what we will get.
SCOTUS ping!
The justices have only decided two cases from October (Royal Canin v. Wullschlager & Bouarfa v. Mayorkas), three from November (E.M.D. Sales v. Carrera, dismissed Facebook v. Amalgamated Bank & NVIDIA Corp. as improvidently granted). There are still plenty of cases left to decide that are not likely to be closely divided, such as Bufkin v. McDonough (October) and Velasquez v. Garland (November).
We could also get an Opinion on Trump’s firing of the inspectors general.
“The Supreme Court will be issuing Opinions from the October 2024 term this morning at 10:00 a.m.”
What’s the rush...losers. DOGE needs to give this bunch a massive DRE and high colonic.
We have the first opinion, in Williams v. Reed (formerly known as Williams v. Washington).
It is by Justice Kavanaugh, and the vote appears to be 5-4.
So we will have no opinions from Barrett or Jackson today.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-191_q8l1.pdf
Issue(s): Whether exhaustion of state administrative remedies is required to bring claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in state court.
The court holds that when a state court’s application of a state exhaustion requirement effectively gives state officials immunity from federal civil rights claims challenging delays in the administrative process, state courts cannot deny those claims on the ground that the plaintiff has failed to exhaust them.
The Chief Justice, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson all join the Kavanaugh opinion.
We will have at least one more opinion today.
The second opinion:
It is Wisconsin Bell v. US ex rel Heath.
It is by Justice Kagan, and it is unanimous, although there are concurring opinions by Thomas and Kavanaugh.
Issue(s): Whether reimbursement requests submitted to the Federal Communications Commission’s E-rate program are “claims” under the False Claims Act.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1127_k53l.pdf
This is a case about a program that establishes subsidies for the internet and telecom services for schools and libraries across the country. The funds are payable upon receipt of a reimbursement request. The question is whether such a request counts as a “claim” under the False Claims Act. The court holds that the reimbursement requests do satisfy that requirement because the government provided at least a “portion” of the money applied for.
We are expecting one more opinion.
Thank you for the ping, and the running analysis
The finale case for today is Hungary v. Simon.
It is by Sotomayor, and the vote is unanimous
Issue(s): (1) Whether historical commingling of assets suffices to establish that proceeds of seized property have a commercial nexus with the United States under the expropriation exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; (2) whether a plaintiff must make out a valid claim that an exception to the FSIA applies at the pleading stage, rather than merely raising a plausible inference; and (3) whether a sovereign defendant bears the burden of producing evidence to affirmatively disprove that the proceeds of property taken in violation of international law have a commercial nexus with the United States under the expropriation exception to the FSIA.
This was a case about whether Jewish survivors of the Hungarian Holocaust and their heirs could bring a lawsuit in U.S. courts against Hungary and one of its agencies for the alleged expropriation of their property during World War.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act generally bars lawsuits against foreign countries in US courts but carves out an exception for expropriated property, as long as (among other things) the property or property exchanged for the expropriated property has a “commercial nexus” to the United States.
The plaintiffs in this case contended that there was such a nexus because the Hungarian government liquidated their property, commingled the proceeds from the property in a government account, and then used money from that account in connection with commercial activity in the US.
The court today holds that the commingling of funds cannot, by itself, satisfy the FSIA’s commercial nexus exception.
You’re welcome. Not a lot of exciting cases today except for those involved.
BTW, here is the link for the final Opinion from today.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-867_5h26.pdf
My internet connection picked just now to start going funky and dropping packets. So further posts from me might be delayed until the internet fairies fix whatever problem has developed.
We could hear as soon as today about the Trump administration’s emergency application in the Office of Special Counsel case, Bessent v. Dellinger.
And the court may announce another opinion day for next week.
In my opinion, if SCOTUS doesn’t rein in the deep state bureaucracy early in Trump’s term, then they can plan to be very busy over the next four years. The Court needs to come out with a strong Order stating the President is the head of the Executive branch of government.
I appreciate the education I get on your threads. Thank you.
Roberts was supposed to give an opinion on a case about those going after Trump. I have seen nothing.
I’m here for it!
No. Nothing on that today. It was just speculation that SCOTUS would issue something regarding Trump’s authority to fire inspectors general.
Another opinion day has been scheduled for Tuesday.
Thanks for the ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.