Tony Mauro

March 22, 2005 | National Law Journal

The Supreme Court declined Monday to wade into the question of whether it was constitutional for President Bush to appoint William Pryor Jr. to the 11th Circuit during a brief Senate recess last year. The Court's denial of review in three related cases came without comment, but Justice John Paul Stevens cautioned in one of the cases that the denial did not amount to a decision on the merits, leaving some to believe the controversy is not over. Said Sen. Edward Kennedy, "I intend to keep raising this issue."

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read

October 06, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

In an e-mail to the Washington legal community in the summer of 2008 to announce that he and wife Kyndra Rotunda had found new jobs in California, professor Ronald Rotunda wrote an eye-catching final line: "We are ... pleased to be leaving George Mason University."

By Jordan Weissmann And Tony Mauro

5 minute read

May 03, 2010 | Law.com

Widely seen as the front-runner for the Supreme Court nomination, Solicitor General Elena Kagan made no mention of the vacancy or the speculation while speaking at a Thursday award ceremony honoring Justice Anthony Kennedy. Kagan did raise eyebrows when she said she would remember an exchange she had with Kennedy during her first high court argument "for the rest of my career as an advocate" -- perhaps not an expected statement from someone anticipating that career will end in a few months with a high court confirmation.

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read

October 15, 2008 | National Law Journal

Is Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. already getting bored with traditional opinion-writing? Or, as one mystery writer and former attorney speculates, could he have lost a bet to Justice Antonin Scalia? In an extraordinary dissent from a Supreme Court denial of review issued in a fairly routine drug arrest case, Roberts starts off with two paragraphs that hark back to the best, or worst, of the hard-boiled mystery genre. Just one of the more memorable passages: "The neighborhood? Tough as a three-dollar steak."

By Tony Mauro

2 minute read

January 10, 2006 | The Recorder

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito Jr. may be portrayed as shy and bland, but his Senate confirmation hearings are expected to be anything but dull.

By Tony Mauro

10 minute read

February 24, 2005 | Law.com

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday looked askance at a California policy that segregates new prisoners by race, ruling that, even in prisons, racial distinctions can survive only by meeting the toughest "strict scrutiny" standard. The 5-3 ruling in Johnson v. California sends the policy back to lower federal courts in California for re-examination under the new standard -- a review that could spell the end of the policy.

By Tony Mauro

4 minute read

June 29, 2010 | Law.com

In a major separation-of-powers ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday said that members of an accounting oversight board created as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act were too insulated from presidential authority to be part of an accountable executive branch. The ruling represents a defeat for Solicitor General Elena Kagan, who had defended the constitutionality of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.

By Tony Mauro and Marcia Coyle

3 minute read

February 22, 2008 | New Jersey Law Journal

In three business rulings handed down Wednesday, the Supreme Court continued its trend toward freeing companies from the conflicting regulation of 50 different states in favor of one federal regime.

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read

September 16, 2010 | Law.com

Sen. Arlen Specter says it's full steam ahead for his effort to require the Supreme Court to allow televised broadcast of its proceedings, in spite of a newly announced experiment with camera access in lower federal courts. Specter dismissed the Judicial Conference's new pilot program for civil trials in district courts as a "will o' the wisp" that does not change his determination to pass his own legislation on cameras in the Supreme Court.

By Tony Mauro

2 minute read

February 24, 2005 | National Law Journal

The Supreme Court looked askance Wednesday at a California policy that segregates new prisoners by race, ruling that racial distinctions can survive only by meeting the toughest "strict scrutiny" standard. The 5-3 ruling sends the policy back to lower courts for re-examination -- which could spell the policy's end. The majority opinion affirmed the use of strict scrutiny in evaluating government policies or laws that make racial distinctions and are challenged on equal protection grounds.

By Tony Mauro

4 minute read