Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

David S. Cohen, JD, is available to comment on violence against abortion clinic workers and other issues related to reproductive rights. Cohen is a constitutional law and gender issues expert and an associate professor at the School of Law at Drexel University in Philadelphia.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

Derek Black, a professor of education, civil rights and constitutional law at the University of South Carolina, is among the leading U.S. scholars on the landmark Brown decision.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

Support higher among those who may be more likely to directly benefit from affordable birth control.

• share
• favorite_border

The U.S. Supreme Court, in the McCutcheon v. FEC decision, removed the cap on the number and amount of donations a person can give during political campaigns. Gregory Magarian, JD, election law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, says that this decision will have a major impact on campaigns – a much bigger impact than the earlier Citizens United campaign finance decision. This decision “marks then end of campaign finance regulation as we know it,” says Magarian.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

On March 25, the Supreme Court will hear the arguments surrounding lawsuits filed by two for-profit companies who argue that they should be exempt from the Affordable Care Act’s mandate on contraceptive services. A friend of the court brief filed recently argues against that point of view, saying that a religious exemption for such companies would deny affordable birth control to millions of American women and their families.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

New research finds only 3-6% of death-eligible defendants in Texas are actually sentenced to death.

• share
• favorite_border

In his latest book, "Pathways to the U.S. Supreme Court: From the Arena to the Monastery," University of Vermont Professor Garrison Nelson, places all 112 Supreme Court justices nominated since the court's inception in 1789 into four categories based on how they reached the nation’s highest court. The result is a fascinating look at how the court evolved from one occupied by individuals with life experience outside the judiciary to one with political ideologues vetted through a process that starts in law school and ends with an appointment to the Supreme Court via a federal judgeship, also known as the "judicial monastery."

• share
• favorite_border

The U.S. Supreme Court debate over whether to maintain buffer zones restricting protestors at Massachusetts reproductive clinics returns to familiar constitutional territory justices already have ruled on, Lucinda Finley says.

• share
• favorite_border

Hobby Lobby is seeking a religious exemption from covering certain forms of contraception it would be required to provide under the Affordable Health Care Act. The case is headed to the Supreme Court, with oral arguments set to begin this spring. “Granting the exemption would shift the cost of accommodating Hobby Lobby’s religious exercise to employees who do not share its beliefs,” argues Elizabeth Sepper, JD, associate professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis. “Such cost-shifting violates the Establishment Clause.”

• share
• favorite_border

The Supreme Court is expected to rule this spring on whether prayers before town hall meetings violate the First Amendment clause that prohibits the establishment of religion. John Inazu, a First Amendment expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, highlights one dimension of the litigation often unaddressed by commentators: what he calls the “mistakes of the past, present and future” adopted by proponents of legislative prayer.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

A new paper by an Indiana University professor sheds new light on the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act, which many critics said threatens state sovereignty and individual liberties. The paper comes at a time when problems with the act’s implementation, particularly the creation of state health care exchanges, highlight the limits of federal capabilities and the importance of state cooperation in the success of domestic government programs.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

The controversy and legal battles surrounding the contraception mandate in the Affordable Care Act have led to a new – and worrisome – legal concept: the idea of a “corporate conscience,” warns Elizabeth Sepper, who teaches at Washington University School of Law in St. Louis.

• share
• favorite_border

Members of the National Communication Association who study free speech and spiritual communication can provide insight into the following: What arguments might be made during the discussion of this case?; What previous Supreme Court decisions and/or cases might impact the outcome of this case?; What are the free speech implications of this ruling?

• share
• favorite_border

Anti-abortion groups are well known for demonstrating and sidewalk counseling at women’s reproductive health facilities, but a Massachusetts statute criminalizes even peaceful expression on public sidewalks near these clinics. An upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case will determine the constitutionality of Massachusetts’ selective exclusion law, which applies only to streets and sidewalks near reproductive health-care facilities. “If Massachusetts can close off the sidewalks surrounding reproductive health centers to peaceful expressive activity, then the government can prohibit expression in a wide range of circumstances,” says John Inazu, JD, First Amendment expert and associate professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis.​

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

AACC is pleased to announce the addition of a late-breaking session, The Supreme Court Decision on Human Gene Patents and Its Implications, to its scientific program at the 2013 AACC Annual Meeting & Clinical Lab Expo in Houston.

• share
• favorite_border

The American Sociological Association (ASA) applauds the U.S. Supreme Court for its decision Wednesday to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).