UCHastings Instagram

          The 134th UC Hastings College of the Law commencement is coming up fast! #Scrolls #UCHastings2015
          Instagram Photo Likes heywheresgina, nelson_goins, emiliol89 and 37 others like this.
          Thursday, November 07, 2013

          Professors Dodson, Little Add Context and Clarity to Pending Supreme Court Cases via SCOTUSBlog Commentary

          SCOTUSBlog is the most widely-read and relied upon resource for all things related to the US Supreme Court.

          With the new Supreme Court term well under way, UC Hastings Professors are chiming in to add context and clarity to some of the Court’s early cases for SCOTUSBlog, the most widely-read and trusted resource about the US Supreme Court.

          Scott DodsonProfessor Scott Dodson offered a pre-argument summary in Sprint Communications, Inc. v. Jacobs, the day before oral arguments were heard at the Court, and then a post-argument summary of how the litigants presented their positions. "The argument seemed more one-sided than a two-headed penny," Dodson wrote. "Counsel for petitioner Sprint faced only fifteen questions, while counsel for respondent IUB faced around forty. Further, the Justices took up only seventy-seven transcript lines of Sprint’s 456 total but a whopping 217 of the IUB’s 514. Look for a unanimous reversal from the Court in short order," he predicted.

          Rory LittleProfessor Rory Little has offered a similar preview for Fernandez v. California, a criminal procedure case garnering significant attention in the press. You can read his complete preview here.

          Professor Little also offered an opinion analysis for Burt v. Titlow, the first full criminal law case of the new term. "Titlow presented various follow-on questions after two 2012 decisions, which extended ineffective assistance of counsel doctrine to the plea bargaining context," Little wrote. "But the Court’s nine-to-zero ruling (with Justice Sotomayor filing a separate concurrence and Justice Ginsburg concurring only in the judgment) did not resolve most of those follow-up questions. Instead, the Court was plainly more concerned about the Sixth Circuit’s failure to apply the 'doubly deferential' standards of federal habeas corpus law."

          ##

          Go to News Archive

          Share this Story

          Share via Facebook
          Share via TwitterShare via EmailPrint Friendly Version

          Other Recent Stories/ RSS

          Friday, April 24, 2015

          Thinkers & Doers: April 24, 2015

          UC Hastings community members in the news and making moves, April 17, 2015 - April 24, 2015.
          Tuesday, April 21, 2015

          Outstanding: Results from the 2015 Student Giving Campaign

          Campus groups benefit from matched donations of $9,000.
          Tuesday, April 21, 2015

          Justin Buell '09 Finds Truth in Photography

          Following his passion after running a successful political consulting firm.
          Monday, April 20, 2015

          3Ls Crowned National Champions at Prince Evidence Moot Court Competition

          It's the second win in three years for the moot court.
          Friday, April 17, 2015

          3Ls Hayley Reynolds & Daniel Zarchy Win at Ninth Circuit

          Case presents novel issue of whether witness tampering is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of federal immigration proceedings, writes Stephen Tollafield, Professor & Associate Director, Legal Writing & Moot Court Department.
          Go to News Archive