Federal Judiciary

Friday round-up

By Kali Borkoski

At the close of a busy week, the decision in Williamson v. Mazda Motors of America, which Amanda covered yesterday, is still generating discussion. Writing for the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, Ashby Jones has coverage of the decision, while Annie Decker ? writing for ACSblog ? considers how the decision in Williamson is distinguishable from the Court?s 2000 decision in another automobile preemption case, Geier v. American Honda Motor Co. Debra Cassens Weiss at the ABA Journal and Elizabeth Wydra at the Constitutional Accountability Center have also written about Williamson, with a focus in particular on Justice Thomas?s concurring opinion.

In a piece appearing at The Cocklebur, David Franklin considers both decided and pending cases on the Court?s docket this term and the relationship between the Chamber of Commerce and the Court. Franklin concludes that ?[t]he Court isn?t driven by pro-business bias, exactly, but most of the justices share the same dim view of litigation that the Chamber repeatedly propounds in its briefs.?

Tony Mauro at The BLT and Daniel Richey, writing for Jurist, have coverage of a letter submitted by a group of law professors to Congress seeking legislation that would bring the Justices under the same code of conduct that currently applies to other federal judges.

At NPR, Fresh Air has an interview with Lawrence Goldstone, the author of Inherently Unequal: The Betrayal of Equal Rights by the Supreme Court 1865-1903.

Full post as published by SCOTUSBLOG on February 25, 2011 (boomark / email).