The Supreme Court today upheld an Indiana law requiring voters to present photo identification in order to vote in elections - a rule that faced constitutional scrutiny by the Court by challengers who said the law would keep poor, older and minority voters from the polls.
“The severity of [voters' burden by the rule] is, of course, mitigated by the fact that, if eligible, voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will ultimately be counted,” Stevens wrote. Even though they would have to travel potentially long distances to the circuit court clerk’s office do so, Stevens wrote, “it is unlikely that such a requirement would pose a constitutional problem unless it is wholly unjustified. And even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek in this litigation.”
Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. and Justice Anthony Kennedy joined Stevens’ opinion, while Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito concurred.
With oral arguments behind them, it’s crunch time for the justices of the Supreme Court, who still have many cases to decide before the term ends. They meet in conference today. And DC Dicta was remiss not to mention Justice John Paul Stevens’s birthday in last week’s docket. Stevens turned the spry young age of 88 last weekend. Only Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes graced the bench at an older age - he served until he was 90.
Meanwhile:
Are you still sore about the Supreme Court’s role in the 2000 presidential election? Justice Antonin Scalia has a message for you: “Get over it. It’s so old by now.” You can see his full “60 Minutes” interview with Lesley Stahl this Sunday, but here’s a preview:
The very last oral argument case this term involved the question of what happens in an age discrimination claim when the evidence offered by the employer and employee results in a tie for the factfinder. Well, it looks like the recusal of Justice Stephen Breyer could mean the Court itself could end up in a tie. (ABA Journal)
An invitation to Justice Clarence Thomas to speak at the commencement ceremony at the University of Georgia has sparked controversy. Some students and faculty called the invitation inappropriate given recent problems with claims of sexual harassment as the school. But the school’s president stands by his choice and the Atlanta Journal Constitution agrees. (U.S. News; AJC)
President Bush is less than thrilled with Democratic lawmakers’ housing relief plans. (AP)
The government’s plan to crack down on illegal workers could cost employers more than $1 billion a year and legal workers billions in lost wages, a study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says. (AP)
Note to attorneys planning to argue before the Supreme Court: It may not be a good idea to take a swipe at former political candidates, even if it helps make your point and gets a laugh.
The was a lesson learned today by Andrew Herman, counsel for a political candidate seeking to strike down the Millionaire’s Amendment of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which allows opponents of self-funded election candidates to receive campaign contributions above the normal statutory ceiling in some circumstances.
In oral arguments today in the case, Davis v. FEC, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., questioned Herman on his argument that the law benefits incumbents at the expense of challengers.
“Obviously you’re correct that this system benefits incumbents, but it benefits your client in a particular way as well,” Roberts said to Herman, who represented a largely self-funded congressional candidate seeking to unseat an incumbent. “The [political] parties are certainly interested in candidates who will fund themselves because that presents less strain on the party’s resources.”
“Mr. Chief Justice, [the parties] are interested in those candidates only inasmuch as they get elected,” said Herman, turning to the recent GOP presidential race for an example. “The moment that the public turns on them, they won’t be interested. And certainly the public was not particularly interested in Mitt Romney, who spent a significant amount of money on his own behalf, and many other spectacular flameouts.”
This drew a laugh from the crowd, and then a light admonition from the Chief Justice.
“I’m not sure we need characterizations of the political candidates in this forum,” Chief Justice Roberts said, drawing more laughs.
Backers of Edwards, who had strong support from trial attorneys, have turned to Obama by a 2-to-1 margin over Sen. Hillary Clinton, according to the report.
Obama pulled in $200,000 from Edwards donors who had not previously given to Obama last month. Clinton pulled in $114,000 in first-time donations from Edwards contributors last month.
Of course these numbers represent only a drop in the bucket for these candidates: Obama took in $56 million overall last month, as Clinton pulled in a personal best $35 million. But in a tight race as this one, every dollar counts.
Said one lawyer and former Edwards backer: “I looked at both the candidates and basically the reason I chose to shift allegiance over to Obama was how I perceived his message of hope.”
Both justices routinely participate in primary and general elections, with registered Democrat Ginsburg being a regular at her Washington, D.C. polling place, and Scalia frequenting the voting station in his Virginia district to cast his vote in Republican primaries and generals.
They “come close to the ‘serial voter’ status prized by political operatives,” the story says.
While most of the justices tend to skip the primaries and vote only in the general elections, the story says, one exception is Justice Stephen Breyer, who cast an absentee ballot in his home Commonwealth of Massachusetts for last week’s Super Tuesday primary (he was actually in Hawaii on election day).
Of course we don’t know who Breyer voted for, although his state went to Sen. Hillary Clinton, the wife of the man who gave Breyer his job, former President Bill Clinton.
The legally-educated candidates that have bowed out previously include former Sen. John Edwards, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Sen. Fred Thompson, and Sens. Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. The non-JDs still fighting on are Sen. John McCain and former Gov. Mike Huckabee.
While most folks in the country are focusing on Super-Duper-Duper-Tuesday, Justice Stephen Breyer is taking advantage of the Supreme Court’s recess this week to speak at various law school and community group events - in Hawaii!
If you are in the Honolulu area today, you can catch the justice at the city’s Rotary Club luncheon today at noon, where he will be the featured speaker. Price is only $25, including lunch!
On Thursday, Breyer will join a panel discussion at a University of Hawaii Law about the Court’s 200 decision in Rice v. Cayetano, where Breyer joined the Court’s 7-2 majority in striking down a law that only native Hawaiians qualified to be trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs as violative of the Fifteenth Amendment because it created a race-based voting qualification
If he has some down time in the Aloha state tomorrow, however, it is unlikely that he will be sunning or catching some waves off Waikiki Beach (pictured), given the weather forecast there. Bummer, dude.
Perhaps in an effort to show conservatives that he is indeed the GOP candidate of choice, not that other guy, Sen. John McCain is stressing that his idea of a good Supreme Court nominee is modeled after President Bush’s picks: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justice Samuel Alito, Jr.
Preparing to address attendees at a conservative gathering later this week, McCain recently told reporters how much he likes Roberts and Alito, and said he did not recall making a comment that Alito “wore his conservatism on his sleeve.”
“I may have said something that I don’t recall, but the fact is that I have a clear record, both publicly and privately, of saying Alito and Roberts are what we want on the Supreme Court,” McCain said to reporters over the weekend.
When the next president is sworn in, more than half of the justices of the Supreme Court will be 70 or older. At the end of the first term of the next president, Justice John Paul Stevens will be nearly 93, so there is more than a decent chance that the next president will name someone to the bench (Lawyers USA subscribers can read more on this issue here).
Meanwhile Northwestern University Law professors Steven G. Calabresi and John O. McGinnis say in an WSJ op-ed piece today that no matter what some conservatives think of McCain, he is the best man for the job of selecting judges who will not subscribe to the “living constitution” school of thought.
While we wait for tomorrow’s forecast from Punxsutawney Phil, (UPDATE: Phil has a lawyer! Meet him here on WSJ’s Law Blog) let’s take a look at what’s happening inside the beltway and beyond:
The U.S. Supreme Court will remain in recess next week, but this week the Court released its oral argument schedule for April, which will be a busy month for the justices. The Court is scheduled to consider whether the death penalty is constitutional as a punishment for child rape (Kentucky v. Louisiana), tackle more federal sentencing guideline issues (Greenlaw v. U.S. and Irizarry v. U.S.) and consider when hearsay evidence from the deceased victim in a murder trial can be admitted (Giles v. California) among other cases. (Supreme Court website) SCOTUSBlog examines how the effects of late-term “docket crunch” makes things a lot more stressful for attorneys arguing before the court in the spring than for those arguing in the fall. (SCOTUSBlog).
Meanwhile, across the street, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a measure that will give federal judges from the circuits to the Supremes a pay raise. (AP)
The Senate put off a vote on that House-passed cash-back economic stimulus plan, apparently worried that they couldn’t get stuff done without Hillary and Barack, who were in California being nice to each other in front of a bunch of celebrities. (WaPo, NYTimes)
The economic stimulus bill hasn’t even been passed yet, but already some thieves have been taking advantage of the rebate check proposal by creating a new scheme for stealing people’s identities, the IRS warns. (IRS)
If Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke thought he had won over investors with his two interest rate cuts in just over a week, another think will soon be coming to him. (AP)
Will your email address change from “@yahoo.com” to “@microsoft.com”?
(CNNMoney)
Former Sen. John Edwards has ended his bid for the Democratic nomination today after failing to win a single early primary race (ABC News).
Edwards, a former trial attorney, had strong financial support among lawyers nationwide.
So DC Dicta poses this question to you: which remaining Democratic candidate do you think will become the new trial attorneys’ darling: Illinois Sen. Barack Obama or New York Sen. Hillary Clinton?
Give us your two cents in the comments section below.
There were eight to start. But then Sens. Chris Dodd (Louisville Law) and Joe Biden (Syracuse Law) dropped out early. Then former Sen. Fred Thompson (Vanderbilt Law) threw in the towel, and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (NYU Law) and Edwards (UNC Law) will reportedly do the same today.
So now three remain: Sens. Obama (Harvard Law) and Clinton (Yale Law), and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (Harvard Law).
The Supreme Court today upheld an Indiana law requiring voters to present photo identification in order to vote in elections - a rule that faced constitutional scrutiny by the Court by challengers who said the law would keep poor, older and minority voters from the polls.
No Comments » | 
Election, Supreme Court | 
Permalink
Posted by Kimberly Atkins
The was a lesson learned today by Andrew Herman, counsel for a political candidate seeking to strike down the Millionaire’s Amendment of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which allows opponents of self-funded election candidates to receive campaign contributions above the normal statutory ceiling in some circumstances.
Backers of Edwards, who had strong support from trial attorneys, have turned to Obama by a 2-to-1 margin over Sen. Hillary Clinton, 
Chances are Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia did.
The Republican presidential nominee will not be a lawyer.
While most folks in the country are focusing on 
On Thursday, Breyer will join a panel discussion at a University of Hawaii Law about the Court’s 200 decision in 
Perhaps in an effort to show conservatives that he is indeed the GOP candidate of choice, not 
While we wait for tomorrow’s forecast from 
Former Sen. John Edwards has ended his bid for the Democratic nomination today after failing to win a single early primary race (
