Anti-abortion demonstrators outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., during oral arguments in the Louisiana abortion clinic case "June Medical Services v. Russo" in 2020. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM With Guns, Abortion and Religion, Judges Become the New Historians
"The run-of-the-mill judge anywhere in the United States is not going to have the knowledge to say this [restriction or regulation] is wrong or right unless there's the odd judge who has read a lot of history," one scholar of American history said. "Their political views will undoubtedly tell them how to evaluate this, what to use. It's very cynical, but true."
June 27, 2022 at 05:44 PM
4 minute read
What You Need to Know
- The Supreme Court's conservative majority has replaced traditional constitutional tests with new tests in the areas of abortion, guns and religion.
- The new tests emphasize history and traditional practices in weighing the constitutionality of state regulations in those three areas.
- Historians say history often does not provide a definitive answer to legal questions—a problem for judges applying the tests.
In less than a week, the U.S. Supreme Court's conservative justices have replaced the usual tests for weighing constitutional violations in the arenas of guns, abortion and religion with a history-tradition test that cements their professed belief in originalism, and creates new challenges for judges and litigants.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
US District Judge in North Carolina Will Take Senior Status
Democrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal With GOP
Amir Ali, MacArthur Justice Center Director, Confirmed to DC District Court
US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
Trending Stories
- 1GE Agrees to $362.5M Deal to End Shareholder Claims Over Power, Insurance Risks
- 2As Political Extremism Rises, is Voter Data the Next Privacy Frontier?
- 3So You Want to be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
- 4US District Judge in North Carolina Will Take Senior Status
- 5From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
