Welcome to another installment of our synopsis on the week’s appellate news, originally reported by Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog. This curation aims to offer a distilled essence of top legal stories for professionals, condensing the need to sift through multiple sources.
Our first highlight revisits the classic debate of Presidential immunity. The former President claims ‘absolute immunity’ against prosecution while historical evidence from various Supreme Court rulings suggest otherwise. Dive deeper into Adam Liptak’s report on The New York Times for detailed insights.
Next, we peer into the gavels of three first-timers at the Supreme Court hoping to also please the court. Jenna Greene from Reuters provides an intriguing edition on their anticipation in her report.
The Supreme Court building, often seen as a stiff symbol of justice, is festooned with animal sculptures, each telling their unique story – all documented in a captivating curator’s booklet. Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal provides an interesting tour of the figurines in his post.
Chris Geidner broaches the topic of judicial extremism in lower courts and its potential influence on the Supreme Court in his Substack post. A thought-provoking read indeed!
In Ohio, an unassuming conservative think tank, the Buckeye Institute, plays an outsized role in the Supreme Court’s agenda setting. Anna Staver of The Columbus Dispatch puts out intriguing insights on this development with her report.
Closing off our roundup, we examine the value of Moot Courts in preparing for appellate oral arguments in the coming installment of the “Upon Further Review” column. Stay tuned to The Legal Intelligencer!
Feel free to explore these stories in full on the original post. Until then, stay informed and engaged in the dynamic landscape of appellate jurisprudence.