Ginsburg Hospitalized, But 'Resting Comfortably' | Docket Watch: Severability in Focus | Covid-19 Cases at the Court | Headlines Roundup: DC Circuit's Griffith Denies Any Retirement Pressure
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, treated for a gallbladder condition, will participate in today's teleconference arguments from a hospital, the court said. The justice is "resting comfortably." We take a look below at the day's cases, and thanks for reading
May 06, 2020 at 07:00 AM
8 minute read
Welcome to Supreme Court Brief. The justices wrap up the first week of telephonic arguments today with challenges involving the Affordable Care Act and its contraceptive insurance requirement, and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act's ban on cellphone robocalls. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will participate in the arguments from the hospital, the court said. Ginsburg was treated this week for a benign gallbladder condition. "The justice is resting comfortably," the court said in a statement. Ginsburg expects to remain in the hospital for a day or two.
Thanks for reading, and your feedback is welcome and appreciated. Want to share thoughts about the telephonic arguments? Contact Marcia Coyle at [email protected] on Twitter at @MarciaCoyle.
Docket Watch: Severability in Focus
Questions about severability—whether courts have the authority to eliminate an unconstitutional or unenforceable provision in a statute—figure in at least three closely watched cases on the justices' docket.
Scheduled for arguments next term, the Affordable Care Act challenge California v. Texas raises the question of whether the health care law's minimum coverage requirement can be severed from the rest of the statute. Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, argued March 3, asks whether the bureau can be severed from the Dodd-Frank Act if the justices rule that it violates the separation of powers.
Severability comes into play this morning in arguments in the case Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, a First Amendment speech dispute. The question before the justices is whether an exception to the robocall ban in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act violates the First Amendment and, if it does, whether the exception can be severed from the statute.
The exception in the TCPA permits calls "made solely to collect a debt owed to or guaranteed by the United States." The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that what is known as the "government-debt exception" is an impermissible content-based restriction on speech and it severed the exception from the act.
This morning, Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart will argue that the exception is not a content-based regulation of speech, but instead a regulation of "a certain kind of economic activity," the collection of government debts. But even if it were a content-based regulation, the act contains a severability provision which requires the exception's removal, leaving the rest of the act intact, according to the government's brief.
Latham & Watkins partner Roman Martinez (above), counsel to the American Association of Political Consultants, counters that the law itself is unconstitutional, a "sweeping restriction" on cellphone calls. The robocall ban, including the government-debt collection exception, allows a certain type of speech (government debt collections) but forbids speech of any other kind. The act, he contends, cannot pass First Amendment "strict scrutiny."
"When a content-based restriction on speech violates the First Amendment, the proper remedy is to invalidate that restriction—not a speech-promoting exception," Martinez wrote in his brief, referring to the government-debt collection exception.
The case has attracted a number of amicus briefs, ranging from local government groups, states, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, among others supporting the government, to Facebook, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, healthcare companies and others backing the association. —Marcia Coyle
Covid-19 Cases Arrive at SCOTUS
The justices now have a briefed application from Pennsylvania challenging state closure order amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Our colleague Max Mitchell in Philadelphia reports that Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reject a petition from a group of Pennsylvania business owners who are challenging his order from March that closed nearly all nonessential businesses in the state.
Wolf submitted a 43-page brief to the justices defending his authority to impose the sweeping orders that has shuttered nearly all businesses in the Keystone State in an effort to help slow the spread of the highly contagious coronavirus. The business owners, led by a political candidate from Allegheny County named Danny DeVito, are asking the justices to block Wolf from enforcing the order.
"Much of what they argue amounts to public policy disagreements as to how the governor used his authority. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court applied well-established principles to conclude that the governor had that authority," Chief Deputy Attorney General J. Bart DeLone said in Pennsylvania's filing at the high court. "Applicants do not challenge the principles themselves; they merely disagree with that court's conclusions. More fundamentally, such public policy prescriptions, as ill-founded as they are, are not legal grounds for challenging the governor's order. The application should be denied."
The application was filed by Harrisburg lawyer Marc Scaringi. Respondents have grossly exceeded their police powers, which only permit isolation and quarantine of persons, not businesses or entities," Scaringi told the court in a supplemental filing late Monday.
>> Separately, Winston & Strawn is representing two elderly inmates at a geriatric Texas state prison unit who contend their rights under the Eighth Amendment and the Americans with Disabilities Act are being violated by prison officials' willful conduct in failing to protect the unit's vulnerable inmates from exposure and death by the virus.
"Every day that the state refuses to implement the measures set forth in the injunction exposes Plaintiffs to serious and irreparable harm from COVID-19. This court's intervention is urgently needed," the Winston & Strawn lawyers wrote. Brandon Duke, of counsel in the firm's Houston office, is counsel of record. Winston & Strawn was on the application with the Edwards Law Firm of Austin, Texas.
Officials in Texas have until Friday to respond. They will ask the court to uphold the Fifth Circuit, which said the state is likely to prevail on the merits. "After accounting for the protective measures TDCJ has taken, the plaintiffs have not shown a 'substantial risk of serious harm' that amounts to 'cruel and unusual punishment,'" the Fifth Circuit said. —Mike Scarcella
Supreme Court Headlines: What We're Reading
Judge Says He Faced No Political Pressure From McConnell To Retire. "My decision was driven entirely by personal concerns and involved no discussions with the White House or the Senate," retiring D.C. Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith (above) said. More from NPR's report: "Griffith said his wife was diagnosed 11 years ago with a 'debilitating chronic illness' and that her health was 'the sole reason for my retirement.' He said he made the decision to retire in June 2019, and privately informed his family and law clerks at the time." [NPR] Griffith's would-be successor—Justin Walker, the former Anthony Kennedy clerk and Brett Kavanaugh clerk (D.C. Circuit) heads to the Senate today for his confirmation hearing. Our colleague Jacqueline Thomsen has more here on what to expect. The ABA is now concluding that Walker, deemed to lack sufficient experience for the trial court, is "well qualified" for the D.C. Circuit.
Barr Urges Trump Administration to Back Off Call to Fully Strike Down Obamacare. "Attorney General William Barr made a last-minute push Monday to persuade the administration to modify its position in the Obamacare dispute that will be heard at the Supreme Court this fall, arguing that the administration should pull back from its insistence that the entire law be struck down. With a Wednesday deadline to make any alterations to its argument looming, Barr made his case." [CNN]
Trump Allies on the Sidelines in Supreme Court Financial Records Fight. "Congressional Republicans who strenuously objected when a Democratic-led U.S. House of Representatives panel subpoenaed President Donald Trump's financial records last year have remained unusually quiet now that the fight has reached the Supreme Court." [Reuters]
'Briefly, Counsel': How Chief Justice Roberts Keeps Phone Arguments Moving. Cutting off lawyers mid-sentence and periodic utterances of "briefly, counsel," Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. is keeping arguments moving at a clip in the virus era. [NLJ]
Did the Constitution Stutter? 'Ramos v. Louisiana' and the Win for Liberty. Hannah Cox, national manager of Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, and Brett L. Tolman, former U.S. attorney for Utah, discuss the history preceding the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision concluding that the Sixth Amendment secures the right to a unanimous jury in state and federal courts. [NLJ]
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
© 2025 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 AllSupreme Court Brief: Billable Hours Rounding Error? | CFPB Imperiled?
The Supreme Court Leaker That Never Was | This Term's 1st Opinion | Attorney-Client Privilege
9 minute readFormer Clerks Face Off As Arguments Resume | Ex-Sotomayor Clerk Joins Cooley | Water War Returns | Headlines: 'Meet SG3'
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Longtime AOC Director Glenn Grant to Step Down, Assignment Judge to Take Over
- 2Elon Musk’s Tesla Pay Case Stokes Chatter Between Lawyers and Clients
- 3Courts Demonstrate Growing Willingness to Sanction Courtroom Misuse of AI
- 4The New Rules of AI: Part 1—Managing Risk
- 5Change Is Coming to the EEOC—But Not Overnight
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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