Monday the Court comes back in style from hibernation, starting the week with Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. Friedrichs is a very important case about compelled speech: Can a union compel public sector employees to contribute to collective bargaining, which is indistinguishable from political lobbying and political activity? A 1977 Supreme Court case said yes, but the Supreme Court has twice recently raised questions about that case’s soundness. You can find Carrie Severino’s amicus brief in that case here. The oral arguments will be a bit longer than usual, with 80 minutes scheduled for argument.
Tuesday is criminal law day, with Molina-Martinez v. United States (How bad is it when a district court wrongly applies the Sentencing Guidelines and the wrong Guidelines range?) and Duncan v. Owens (Can a court grant a writ of habeas corpus when there’s no clearly established precedent?).
The Court finishes the week on Wednesday with two cases about sovereignty, starting with Bank Markazi v. Peterson, in which the Central Bank of Iran is challenging a federal statute under the separation of powers. The second case that day,Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle, will be quite interesting. It concerns whether the double jeopardy clause treats the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as the same sovereign as the United States. The Commonwealth’s brief raises the interesting argument that the people of Puerto Rico “engaged in an exercise of popular sovereignty” in 1952 by adopting a constitution, thus creating a separate sovereign.
Menu