Good morning, and welcome to what’s expected to be a busy week at the court, with lots of interim docket action and at least one opinion day. And remember that you can send questions about the Supreme Court to scotusblog@thedispatch.com for our new Ask Amy section, which runs every Friday.
At the Court
On Friday, Alabama asked the Supreme Court on its interim docket to clear the way for it to use its 2023 congressional map, which was blocked by a federal district court for discriminating against Black voters. For more on Alabama’s filings, see the On Site section below.
Last week, in response to requests from Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro, Justice Samuel Alito temporarily paused a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reinstating the requirement that the abortion pill mifepristone be dispensed only in person. That pause is set to expire today at 5 p.m. EDT, so the court is likely to act soon.
The court has indicated that it may release opinions on Thursday at 10 a.m. EDT. We will be live blogging that morning beginning at 9:30.
Also on Thursday, the justices will meet in a private conference to discuss cases and vote on petitions for review.
Morning Reads
Virginia Democrats ask state Supreme Court to halt redistricting ruling
Julia Mueller, The Hill
On Friday, the Virginia Supreme Court “quashed” the state’s new congressional map, which had been “narrowly approved by voters” and “would have given Democrats as many as four new pickup opportunities ahead of the midterms.” Later that day, Virginia Democrats asked the court “for a stay on its ruling ... signaling plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court,” according to The Hill. “One battle at a time, one fight after another. We’ve come too far to stop now,” wrote Virginia House of Delegates Speaker Don Scott, who is a Democrat, on X on Friday.
Barrett Says Supreme Court Avoiding AI Over Security Concerns
Jordan Fischer, Bloomberg Law (paywalled)
During an appearance in Bentonville, Arkansas, on Saturday, Justice Amy Coney Barrett continued the trend of justices openly reflecting on the role of artificial intelligence in legal work. She said “the Supreme Court isn’t embracing the technology” as quickly as others in the legal industry due to security concerns, according to Bloomberg Law. “The court is not using AI because it would be insecure,” Barrett said. “So you can trust that our opinions are not AI-generated.”
What Justice Gorsuch's new book tells us about America - and himself
Maureen Groppe, USA Today
In a written interview with the USA Today about the children’s book he co-authored with Janie Nitze, Heroes of 1776: The Story of the Declaration of Independence, Justice Neil Gorsuch shared some personal stories about his upbringing and early experiences as a judge. He expressed gratitude for the “Great Books program” he took part in during middle school, which enabled him to connect with “students from other schools” over books that weren’t on his school’s English curriculum. “The program introduced me to greats like C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and George Orwell – authors I would encourage all young readers to explore,” Gorsuch said. He also described a “humbling” moment after becoming an appeals court judge. “Not used to the standard, black polyester choir robe that American judges wear, Gorsuch tripped when walking up the steps to the bench” in a Colorado courtroom. “Some of the papers he was carrying went flying.” “In retrospect,” Gorsuch told USA Today, “a dose of humility was a fitting way to begin the job of a judge.”
Maryland nonprofit wants to take LeBron James firm to Supreme Court in trademark battle
Luke Parker, Baltimore Sun via The Spokesman-Review
Game Plan Inc., a “Maryland nonprofit that sponsors student-athletes,” has asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on “its yearslong trademark fight with Uninterrupted, a multimedia company cofounded by basketball icon LeBron James.” The dispute centers on the phrase “I AM MORE THAN AN ATHLETE,” which Game Plan has used on t-shirts sold for a fundraiser and Uninterrupted has used on its clothing line. “When Uninterrupted ... signaled their intent to place the mark on its own clothing in 2018, Game Plan,” which had used the phrase first and received federal registration for its use in charitable fundraising, “objected, claiming the dual usage would be confusing.” But the “federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board disagreed and dismissed the objection, citing a lack of evidence and Uninterrupted’s commercial, non-charitable purpose.” “Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the board’s ruling.”
Supremely Cringe: Neal Katyal And ‘TED-Gate’
David Lat, Original Jurisdiction
In a post for his Substack, David Lat explored the mostly negative response from legal professionals to Neal Katyal’s TED Talk on his experience arguing the tariffs case before the Supreme Court and how he used AI to prepare for it. As Lat noted, people questioned, among other things, why Katyal acted as if legal scholars had predicted that he would lose and why he “claim[ed] so much personal credit” for the court’s ruling. Katyal addressed the pushback in a comment to Lat, contending that the TED Talk emphasized the value of a strong team and advanced conversations about the role of AI in legal work. “The whole talk is about team ball—how to put together that team in your life to be able to do the things you want to do,” Katyal said. “For lawyers specifically, a winning team may very well turn out to include non-lawyers you can learn from, too.”
On Site
Interim Docket
Alabama asks Supreme Court to clear the way for it to use congressional map struck as diluting Black votes
The ripple effects from the Supreme Court’s April 29 ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, in which the justices struck down Louisiana’s congressional map, made their way to the court for the first time on Friday afternoon. In a 25-page filing, Alabama asked the court to clear the way for it to use a congressional map that it had adopted in 2023, which has one majority-Black district, rather than a court-ordered map that has two such districts.
From the SCOTUSblog Team
What I learned attending all those Supreme Court oral arguments this term
Last summer, Amy took on a project that surprised some of her colleagues in the Supreme Court press room: She decided to attend all of this term’s oral arguments. While Amy ended up missing a few arguments due to travel and illness, she was in the courtroom for the vast majority. Here’s what she learned.
From the SCOTUSblog Team
Will the Supreme Court end nitrogen gas executions?
A new Justice Department report on “strengthening” the federal death penalty noted that the Supreme Court “has never rejected a method of execution as unconstitutional.” Could that change as the court continues fielding challenges to nitrogen gas executions?
A Closer Look
Chief Justice John Roberts at the Third Circuit Conference
You’ve likely already seen some of the headlines from Chief Justice John Roberts’ appearance Wednesday night at the Third Circuit Judicial Conference in Hershey, Pennsylvania. As sources like NBC News and the Associated Press reported, Roberts defended the court against the public misconception that the justices are "political actors" who make policy decisions rather than interpret the law as it stands. But the hour-long conversation ranged well beyond that exchange, as Roberts spoke on his transition to the chief justiceship, his tips for advocates, and how he sees the court’s day-to-day work (including the post-COVID-19 pandemic oral argument format). And he sprinkled in a few anecdotes about AI and Jojo the dog.
The Q&A, led by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit’s Chief Judge Michael Chagares was, as CNN put it, comprised mostly of “softball questions.” But Roberts did share some interesting anecdotes about his appointment to the court. Regarding his elevation to chief justice, Roberts recalled that he had originally been nominated to fill Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s seat, when Chief Justice William Rehnquist died just days before his own confirmation hearings. According to Roberts, he received a call from the White House that night, met with President George W. Bush the following day, and by the next morning he had been nominated to fill the center seat. This delayed the hearings by one week. “I didn’t have a lot of time to think about the difference,” he said. Roberts also joked (as he has before) that “the people who opposed [my nomination] really had a killer question that they did not ask, which was, ‘There’ve been 16 chief justices. Name them.”
Roberts continued that, when he arrived to the court, it was “particularly challenging” given he was the youngest on it, the other justices had been together for 11 years, and he had “made a living looking up to them literally and arguing in front of them.” But Roberts remarked that all eight justices were extremely supportive, even though he got “eight different stories” when he asked them how he should carry out his responsibilities as chief. “It’s hard to be a leader when you can’t fire someone,” Roberts said, and added that Rehnquist (whom Roberts had clerked for) once told him that “you hold the reins of leadership in your hands, but don’t tug on them too closely, you might find they’re not connected to anything.”
When Chagares asked Roberts if he had any tips for lawyers who want to maximize their chances of getting a cert grant, Roberts said that if you have a circuit split, “that’s the best thing to emphasize.” Roberts added that the “worst thing” to say is that there’s been “some horrible miscarriage of justice,” because then the justices think that issue is unlikely to come up very often. Roberts also recommended having something that grabs the justices’ interest at the outset – telling a story about how he wrote a petition to the justices that involved “Red Dog Mine” and spent the first few pages explaining why it’s called that, which is a “great story” (read the link).
In terms of the court’s day-to-day practices, Roberts said he thought that the court’s oral arguments have gotten “a little too long” and are “maybe not as focused as usual.” “I think it has blown up a little bit.” he added. “I think we’ll have to look at it over the summer.”
And when (inevitably) asked about AI, Roberts described himself as “intimidated” by it and then shared the story of how he was “completely flabbergasted” when his son used AI to write a song about the family’s dog, Jojo. Roberts added that he “does not really know” how much AI is used at the court. It was after this remark that Roberts was interrupted by a member of the audience, who stood up and said the back of the room was having trouble hearing the chief. “Does that work better then?” Roberts asked after getting a new microphone handed to him. “Boy, I thought it was a protest!”
At the end of the Q&A, Roberts was gifted a large cardboard sign wrapped in gold paper (that took a bit to unwrap) which read “Judge like a Champion today” – a nod to the chief’s affinity for Notre Dame football.
SCOTUS Quote
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: “Did that deputy solicitor general prevail on that position?”
(Laughter.)
MR. OLSON: “That deputy solicitor general made a beautiful argument, Mr. Chief Justice.”
(Laughter.)
MR. OLSON: “And – and fortunately for him –”
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: “A beautiful losing argument.”
— Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC (2019)