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.
Professor 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.
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."