Welcome to the weekly roundup of notable issues from Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog, a venerable resource focusing on appellate litigation.
One of the most intriguing stories this week revolves around a Pennsylvania case where a tied vote was decided by drawing lots. This unusual solution was necessitated after a court ruled that undated, but timely-arriving, mail ballots had to be counted under the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act. Rick Hasen provides more insights on this in his Election Law Blog post.
Another story that grabs attention concerns the disruptive influence of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals located in New Orleans. This court’s agenda is seen as shaping that of the Supreme Court, making the highest court in the land appear moderate when compared. The full details are available in this article by Steven Mazie in The Economist (subscription may be required for full access).
This week, Texas booksellers have expressed their concerns to the Fifth Circuit about a state law requiring them to rate the sex content of books being used in schools. This ongoing legal challenge is thoroughly presented in a report by Jacqueline Thomsen on Bloomberg Law.
On a related note, an alarming decision from a judge appointed by the Trump administration is said to have significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act, making it nearly unenforceable in seven states. This major shift is discussed in depth by Elie Mystal in his essay at The Nation.
Lastly, Jonathan Stroud and Sam Korte have contributed a guest post to the Patently-O blog on Judgment Preservation Insurance and its significance within the Federal Circuit.
The world of appellate litigation continues to be dynamic and this week’s news certainly proves that. For continued updates, consider Howard Bashman’s How Appealing blog a go-to resource.