| From | Ballotpedia's Bold Justice <[email protected]> |
| Subject | Bold Justice: SCOTUS grants review in 14 additional cases |
| Date | January 18, 2021 9:57 PM |
Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
Alexander Hamilton may have thought them the least dangerous branch, but we at Ballotpedia think federal courts are the most exciting!
[Bold Justice by Ballotpedia]
Welcome to the January 18 edition of _Bold Justice_, Ballotpedia’s newsletter about the Supreme Court of the United States ([link removed]) (SCOTUS) and other judicial happenings around the U.S.
2021 is already off to a fast start for the Court! SCOTUS granted review in 14 cases since our last report and issued its first opinions of the new year. For comparison, the court’s highest number of grants ordered in a single day was 11 in its 2019-2020 term ([link removed]) and eight in its 2018-2019 term ([link removed]) .
Stay up to date on the latest news by following Ballotpediaon Twitter ([link removed]) or subscribing to the Daily Brew ([link removed]) .
** SHARE THIS NEWSLETTER
------------------------------------------------------------
[link removed] out this info I found from Ballotpedia&body=[link removed]
The Supreme Court will hear two hours of oral arguments during the week of January 18 ([link removed]) via teleconference with live audio. The court is conducting proceedings this way in accordance with public health guidance in response to COVID-19 ([link removed]) .
Click the links below to read more about the specific cases before SCOTUS during the second week of its January sitting ([link removed]) .
JANUARY 19
* FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project ([link removed]) , a case consolidated withNational Association of Broadcasters v. Prometheus Radio Project ([link removed]) , concerns changes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made to media ownership rules and whether the FCC adequately considered how the changes would affect women- and minority-owned media.
The consolidated cases originated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ([link removed]) . The FCC issued modifications and orders following a 2016 review of broadcast media ownership rules. A group of petitioners challenged several of the rule changes with the 3rd Circuit.
The 3rd Circuit issued several rulings:
* The petitioners had standing to challenge the changes.
* The FCC's retention of the top-four component ([link removed]) of local television ownership rules and the Incubator Order’s ([link removed]) definition of comparable markets were not arbitrary or capricious.
* The FCC was not unreasonable in delaying action related to an industry procurement rule proposal ([link removed]) .
* The FCC had not sufficiently considered the how the changes would affect women- and minority-owned media.
* As a result, the court vacated and remanded the FCC's orders and its definition of "eligible entities," and denied the petitioners' request to appoint a special master to ensure the FCC complied with the court’s rulings in a timely manner.
* [link removed] ISSUE: “Whether the court of appeals erred in vacating as arbitrary and capricious the FCC orders under review, which, among other things, relaxed the agency's cross-ownership restrictions to accommodate changed market conditions.”
* BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore ([link removed]) concerns the authority of an appeals court to review issues in removal orders.
The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ([link removed]) . The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Maryland ("Baltimore") sued 26 multinational oil and gas companies in state court, alleging the companies contributed to and were partially responsible for climate change and that the companies' actions injured Baltimore.
Two of the companies filed to move the case to federal court, claiming federal law governed the issues raised in the suit. Baltimore filed a motion with the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ([link removed]) to move, or remand, the case back to state court. The district court granted Baltimore's request and denied the companies' removal request. The companies appealed to the 4th Circuit. The court affirmed the district court's grant of Baltimore's remand request.
* [link removed] ISSUE: “Whether 28 U.S.C. 1447(d) permits a court of appeals to review any issue encompassed in a district court’s order remanding a removed case to state court where the removing defendant premised removal in part on the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. 1442, or the civil rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. 1443.”
** OPINIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
SCOTUS ruled on one case since our January 11 issue. The court has issued rulings in 11 cases ([link removed]) so far this term. 31 cases are still under deliberation.
Click the links below to read more about the specific cases SCOTUS ruled on since January 11:
* JANUARY 14
* City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton ([link removed]) was argued before the court on October 13, 2020.
THE CASE: The City of Chicago, Illinois, (“Chicago”) towed and impounded Robbin Fulton's vehicle. Fulton filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in federal bankruptcy court. Fulton requested that Chicago return her vehicle. Chicago declined the request. Fulton asked the court to sanction Chicago for not returning the car. Chicago asserted it would retain possession of the vehicle, citing an exemption to the federal bankruptcy code’s automatic stay provision. The automatic stay provision requires the immediate return of property once a bankruptcy petition is filed.
The bankruptcy court ruled that Chicago was required to return the vehicle, imposed sanctions, and sustained Fulton's objection to Chicago's assertion of its status as a secured creditor. Chicago returned the vehicle and appealed to the 7th Circuit. The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's ruling.
The issue ([link removed]) : “Whether an entity that is passively retaining possession of property in which a bankruptcy estate has an interest has an affirmative obligation under the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay, 11 U.S.C § 362, to return that property to the debtor or trustee immediately upon the filing of the bankruptcy petition.”
THE OUTCOME: In a unanimous 8-0 opinion, the court vacated the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit's ([link removed]) ruling and remanded the case, holding that retaining property after a bankruptcy petition is filed does not violate the Bankruptcy Code.
JusticeSamuel Alito ([link removed]) delivered the majority opinion of the court. JusticeSonia Sotomayor ([link removed]) filed a concurring opinion. JusticeAmy Coney Barrett ([link removed]) took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
** GRANTS
------------------------------------------------------------
On January 8, 2021, SCOTUS granted review in 14 cases for a total of 12 hours of oral argument, to be scheduled during its 2020-2021 term.
SCOTUS has agreed to hear 60 cases during its 2020-2021 term. Twelve of those were originally scheduled for the 2019-2020 term but were delayed due to the coronavirus pandemic.Click here ([link removed]) to read more about SCOTUS’ current term.
In its October 2019 term ([link removed]) , SCOTUS heard arguments in 61 cases.Click here ([link removed]) to read more about SCOTUS’ previous term.
Click the links below to read more about the 14 cases SCOTUS recently added to its merits docket. The cases are listed by the lower courts from which they originated:
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 3RD CIRCUIT
* Sanchez v. Wolf ([link removed])
* Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. ([link removed])
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 4TH CIRCUIT
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/United-States-v--Gary--United/34jy37/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I States v. Gary_
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 5TH CIRCUIT
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/Texas-v--Hotels-com-L-P---City/34jy39/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I of San Antonio, Texas v. Hotels.com, L.P.__ _
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 9TH CIRCUIT
* United States v. Palomar-Santiago ([link removed])
* Americans for Prosperity v. Becerra ([link removed]) _ (_Consolidated with_ Thomas More Law Center v. Becerra)_
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 10TH CIRCUIT
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/els-Association--HollyFrontier/34jy3h/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Association_
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 11TH CIRCUIT
* Greer v. United States ([link removed])
* Terry v. United States ([link removed])
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
* Mnuchin v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation ([link removed]) _ (_Consolidated with_ Alaska Native Village Corporation Association v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation)_
* Guam v. United States ([link removed])
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
* Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc. ([link removed])
** UPCOMING SCOTUS DATES
------------------------------------------------------------
Here are the court’s upcoming dates of interest:
* January 19:
* SCOTUS will release orders.
* SCOTUS will hear arguments in three cases.
* January 22: SCOTUS will conference. A conference is a private meeting of the justices.
* January 25: SCOTUS will release orders.
[link removed]
Who were the two most recent justices to join the court on the same day?
* William Cushing and John Blair ([link removed])
* Stanley Forman Reed and Felix Frankfurter ([link removed])
* David Souter and Clarence Thomas ([link removed])
* Lewis Powell and William Rehnquist ([link removed])
Choose an answer to find out!
**
------------------------------------------------------------
** CONFIRMATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
The Senate confirmed no new nominees since our January 11 issue.
Overall, the Senate has confirmed 234 of President Trump’s judicial nominees—174 district court judges, 54 appeals court judges, three Court of International Trade judges, and three Supreme Court justices—since January 2017.
** NOMINATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
President Trump announced no new nominees since our January 11 edition.
The president has announced 274 Article III ([link removed]) judicial nominations since taking office on January 20, 2017. The president named 69 judicial nominees in 2017, 92 in 2018, and 77 in 2019. For more information on the president’s judicial nominees, click here ([link removed]) .
** VACANCIES
------------------------------------------------------------
The federal judiciary currently has 49 vacancies. As of publication, there were six pending nominations.
For more information on judicial vacancies during Trump's term, click here ([link removed]) .
** COMMITTEE ACTION
------------------------------------------------------------
The Senate Judiciary Committee ([link removed]) reported no new nominees out of committee since our January 11 edition.
Do you love judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? We figured you might. Our monthly Federal Vacancy Count ([link removed]) , published at the start of each month, monitors all the faces and places moving in, moving out, and moving on in the federal judiciary. Click here ([link removed]) for our most current count.
Need a daily fix of judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? Click here ([link removed]) for continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.
Or, if you prefer, we also maintain a list of individuals ([link removed]) nominated by the president.
In the next few _Bold Justice_ editions, we’re rounding out our spotlight on U.S. Supreme Court justices. Today, we’re learning about Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Kavanaugh has been an associate justice since October 6, 2018. President Donald Trump (R) nominated Kavanaugh on July 9, 2018, to succeed Anthony Kennedy ([link removed]) . The U.S. Senate voted to confirm Kavanaugh 50-48 on October 6, 2018.
Before joining the U.S. Supreme Court, Kavanaugh was a judge with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ([link removed]) (2006-2018). Before that, he was an assistant and staff secretary deputy to President George W. Bush ([link removed]) (R) (2003-2006), an associate counsel for the Executive Branch (2001-2003), an associate counsel with the Office of Independent Counsel (1998), and he served as general counsel for the Judiciary Branch (1994-1997). Click here ([link removed]) to learn more about Kavanaugh’s professional career.
Kavanaugh was born in Washington, D.C. He attended Georgetown Preparatory School. He earned a B.A. from Yale College in 1987, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1990.
In the 2019-2020 term, Kavanaugh wrote the following opinions:
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/litical-Consultants-Inc---Barr/34jy4t/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc._
* USAID v. Alliance for Open Society International ([link removed])
* Thole v. U.S. Bank ([link removed])
* Nasrallah v. Barr ([link removed])
* Barton v. Barr ([link removed])
* McKinney v. Arizona ([link removed])
**
------------------------------------------------------------
We’ll be back on February 8 with a new edition of _Bold Justice_. Until then, gaveling out!
** CONTRIBUTIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
Kate Carsella ([link removed]) compiled and edited this newsletter, with contributions from Sara Reynolds and Jace Lington ([link removed]) .
** EVERYTHING ON BALLOTPEDIA IS FREE TO READ
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
But it isn't free to produce. We depend on people like you to ensure that access to neutral and accurate information about American politics stays available to all. Donations to Ballotpedia are tax deductible and go directly toward producing great content like this newsletter.
Please consider donating today!
DONATE TO BALLOTPEDIA ([link removed])
BALLOTPEDIA NEWS ([link removed])
STAY CONNECTED
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed]
------------------------------------------------------------
GET OUR APP
[link removed]
SUPPORT BALLOTPEDIA ([link removed])
BALLOTPEDIA
8383 Greenway Blvd | Suite 600 | Middleton, WI 53562
Decide which emails you would like to get from Ballotpedia
Update your preferences ( [link removed] ) | Unsubscribe ( [link removed] )
COPYRIGHT © 2020. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
[Bold Justice by Ballotpedia]
Welcome to the January 18 edition of _Bold Justice_, Ballotpedia’s newsletter about the Supreme Court of the United States ([link removed]) (SCOTUS) and other judicial happenings around the U.S.
2021 is already off to a fast start for the Court! SCOTUS granted review in 14 cases since our last report and issued its first opinions of the new year. For comparison, the court’s highest number of grants ordered in a single day was 11 in its 2019-2020 term ([link removed]) and eight in its 2018-2019 term ([link removed]) .
Stay up to date on the latest news by following Ballotpediaon Twitter ([link removed]) or subscribing to the Daily Brew ([link removed]) .
** SHARE THIS NEWSLETTER
------------------------------------------------------------
[link removed] out this info I found from Ballotpedia&body=[link removed]
The Supreme Court will hear two hours of oral arguments during the week of January 18 ([link removed]) via teleconference with live audio. The court is conducting proceedings this way in accordance with public health guidance in response to COVID-19 ([link removed]) .
Click the links below to read more about the specific cases before SCOTUS during the second week of its January sitting ([link removed]) .
JANUARY 19
* FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project ([link removed]) , a case consolidated withNational Association of Broadcasters v. Prometheus Radio Project ([link removed]) , concerns changes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made to media ownership rules and whether the FCC adequately considered how the changes would affect women- and minority-owned media.
The consolidated cases originated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ([link removed]) . The FCC issued modifications and orders following a 2016 review of broadcast media ownership rules. A group of petitioners challenged several of the rule changes with the 3rd Circuit.
The 3rd Circuit issued several rulings:
* The petitioners had standing to challenge the changes.
* The FCC's retention of the top-four component ([link removed]) of local television ownership rules and the Incubator Order’s ([link removed]) definition of comparable markets were not arbitrary or capricious.
* The FCC was not unreasonable in delaying action related to an industry procurement rule proposal ([link removed]) .
* The FCC had not sufficiently considered the how the changes would affect women- and minority-owned media.
* As a result, the court vacated and remanded the FCC's orders and its definition of "eligible entities," and denied the petitioners' request to appoint a special master to ensure the FCC complied with the court’s rulings in a timely manner.
* [link removed] ISSUE: “Whether the court of appeals erred in vacating as arbitrary and capricious the FCC orders under review, which, among other things, relaxed the agency's cross-ownership restrictions to accommodate changed market conditions.”
* BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore ([link removed]) concerns the authority of an appeals court to review issues in removal orders.
The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ([link removed]) . The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Maryland ("Baltimore") sued 26 multinational oil and gas companies in state court, alleging the companies contributed to and were partially responsible for climate change and that the companies' actions injured Baltimore.
Two of the companies filed to move the case to federal court, claiming federal law governed the issues raised in the suit. Baltimore filed a motion with the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ([link removed]) to move, or remand, the case back to state court. The district court granted Baltimore's request and denied the companies' removal request. The companies appealed to the 4th Circuit. The court affirmed the district court's grant of Baltimore's remand request.
* [link removed] ISSUE: “Whether 28 U.S.C. 1447(d) permits a court of appeals to review any issue encompassed in a district court’s order remanding a removed case to state court where the removing defendant premised removal in part on the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. 1442, or the civil rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. 1443.”
** OPINIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
SCOTUS ruled on one case since our January 11 issue. The court has issued rulings in 11 cases ([link removed]) so far this term. 31 cases are still under deliberation.
Click the links below to read more about the specific cases SCOTUS ruled on since January 11:
* JANUARY 14
* City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton ([link removed]) was argued before the court on October 13, 2020.
THE CASE: The City of Chicago, Illinois, (“Chicago”) towed and impounded Robbin Fulton's vehicle. Fulton filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in federal bankruptcy court. Fulton requested that Chicago return her vehicle. Chicago declined the request. Fulton asked the court to sanction Chicago for not returning the car. Chicago asserted it would retain possession of the vehicle, citing an exemption to the federal bankruptcy code’s automatic stay provision. The automatic stay provision requires the immediate return of property once a bankruptcy petition is filed.
The bankruptcy court ruled that Chicago was required to return the vehicle, imposed sanctions, and sustained Fulton's objection to Chicago's assertion of its status as a secured creditor. Chicago returned the vehicle and appealed to the 7th Circuit. The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's ruling.
The issue ([link removed]) : “Whether an entity that is passively retaining possession of property in which a bankruptcy estate has an interest has an affirmative obligation under the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay, 11 U.S.C § 362, to return that property to the debtor or trustee immediately upon the filing of the bankruptcy petition.”
THE OUTCOME: In a unanimous 8-0 opinion, the court vacated the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit's ([link removed]) ruling and remanded the case, holding that retaining property after a bankruptcy petition is filed does not violate the Bankruptcy Code.
JusticeSamuel Alito ([link removed]) delivered the majority opinion of the court. JusticeSonia Sotomayor ([link removed]) filed a concurring opinion. JusticeAmy Coney Barrett ([link removed]) took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
** GRANTS
------------------------------------------------------------
On January 8, 2021, SCOTUS granted review in 14 cases for a total of 12 hours of oral argument, to be scheduled during its 2020-2021 term.
SCOTUS has agreed to hear 60 cases during its 2020-2021 term. Twelve of those were originally scheduled for the 2019-2020 term but were delayed due to the coronavirus pandemic.Click here ([link removed]) to read more about SCOTUS’ current term.
In its October 2019 term ([link removed]) , SCOTUS heard arguments in 61 cases.Click here ([link removed]) to read more about SCOTUS’ previous term.
Click the links below to read more about the 14 cases SCOTUS recently added to its merits docket. The cases are listed by the lower courts from which they originated:
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 3RD CIRCUIT
* Sanchez v. Wolf ([link removed])
* Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. ([link removed])
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 4TH CIRCUIT
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/United-States-v--Gary--United/34jy37/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I States v. Gary_
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 5TH CIRCUIT
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/Texas-v--Hotels-com-L-P---City/34jy39/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I of San Antonio, Texas v. Hotels.com, L.P.__ _
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 9TH CIRCUIT
* United States v. Palomar-Santiago ([link removed])
* Americans for Prosperity v. Becerra ([link removed]) _ (_Consolidated with_ Thomas More Law Center v. Becerra)_
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 10TH CIRCUIT
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/els-Association--HollyFrontier/34jy3h/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Association_
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 11TH CIRCUIT
* Greer v. United States ([link removed])
* Terry v. United States ([link removed])
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
* Mnuchin v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation ([link removed]) _ (_Consolidated with_ Alaska Native Village Corporation Association v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation)_
* Guam v. United States ([link removed])
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
* Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc. ([link removed])
** UPCOMING SCOTUS DATES
------------------------------------------------------------
Here are the court’s upcoming dates of interest:
* January 19:
* SCOTUS will release orders.
* SCOTUS will hear arguments in three cases.
* January 22: SCOTUS will conference. A conference is a private meeting of the justices.
* January 25: SCOTUS will release orders.
[link removed]
Who were the two most recent justices to join the court on the same day?
* William Cushing and John Blair ([link removed])
* Stanley Forman Reed and Felix Frankfurter ([link removed])
* David Souter and Clarence Thomas ([link removed])
* Lewis Powell and William Rehnquist ([link removed])
Choose an answer to find out!
**
------------------------------------------------------------
** CONFIRMATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
The Senate confirmed no new nominees since our January 11 issue.
Overall, the Senate has confirmed 234 of President Trump’s judicial nominees—174 district court judges, 54 appeals court judges, three Court of International Trade judges, and three Supreme Court justices—since January 2017.
** NOMINATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
President Trump announced no new nominees since our January 11 edition.
The president has announced 274 Article III ([link removed]) judicial nominations since taking office on January 20, 2017. The president named 69 judicial nominees in 2017, 92 in 2018, and 77 in 2019. For more information on the president’s judicial nominees, click here ([link removed]) .
** VACANCIES
------------------------------------------------------------
The federal judiciary currently has 49 vacancies. As of publication, there were six pending nominations.
For more information on judicial vacancies during Trump's term, click here ([link removed]) .
** COMMITTEE ACTION
------------------------------------------------------------
The Senate Judiciary Committee ([link removed]) reported no new nominees out of committee since our January 11 edition.
Do you love judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? We figured you might. Our monthly Federal Vacancy Count ([link removed]) , published at the start of each month, monitors all the faces and places moving in, moving out, and moving on in the federal judiciary. Click here ([link removed]) for our most current count.
Need a daily fix of judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? Click here ([link removed]) for continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.
Or, if you prefer, we also maintain a list of individuals ([link removed]) nominated by the president.
In the next few _Bold Justice_ editions, we’re rounding out our spotlight on U.S. Supreme Court justices. Today, we’re learning about Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Kavanaugh has been an associate justice since October 6, 2018. President Donald Trump (R) nominated Kavanaugh on July 9, 2018, to succeed Anthony Kennedy ([link removed]) . The U.S. Senate voted to confirm Kavanaugh 50-48 on October 6, 2018.
Before joining the U.S. Supreme Court, Kavanaugh was a judge with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ([link removed]) (2006-2018). Before that, he was an assistant and staff secretary deputy to President George W. Bush ([link removed]) (R) (2003-2006), an associate counsel for the Executive Branch (2001-2003), an associate counsel with the Office of Independent Counsel (1998), and he served as general counsel for the Judiciary Branch (1994-1997). Click here ([link removed]) to learn more about Kavanaugh’s professional career.
Kavanaugh was born in Washington, D.C. He attended Georgetown Preparatory School. He earned a B.A. from Yale College in 1987, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1990.
In the 2019-2020 term, Kavanaugh wrote the following opinions:
* _https://go.ballotpedia.org/e/481201/litical-Consultants-Inc---Barr/34jy4t/991000034?h=eASyFKW7pciwE-45LFcqXC-EMDE8pB613vGcr6-Rb-I v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc._
* USAID v. Alliance for Open Society International ([link removed])
* Thole v. U.S. Bank ([link removed])
* Nasrallah v. Barr ([link removed])
* Barton v. Barr ([link removed])
* McKinney v. Arizona ([link removed])
**
------------------------------------------------------------
We’ll be back on February 8 with a new edition of _Bold Justice_. Until then, gaveling out!
** CONTRIBUTIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
Kate Carsella ([link removed]) compiled and edited this newsletter, with contributions from Sara Reynolds and Jace Lington ([link removed]) .
** EVERYTHING ON BALLOTPEDIA IS FREE TO READ
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
But it isn't free to produce. We depend on people like you to ensure that access to neutral and accurate information about American politics stays available to all. Donations to Ballotpedia are tax deductible and go directly toward producing great content like this newsletter.
Please consider donating today!
DONATE TO BALLOTPEDIA ([link removed])
BALLOTPEDIA NEWS ([link removed])
STAY CONNECTED
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed]
------------------------------------------------------------
GET OUR APP
[link removed]
SUPPORT BALLOTPEDIA ([link removed])
BALLOTPEDIA
8383 Greenway Blvd | Suite 600 | Middleton, WI 53562
Decide which emails you would like to get from Ballotpedia
Update your preferences ( [link removed] ) | Unsubscribe ( [link removed] )
COPYRIGHT © 2020. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Message Analysis
- Sender: Ballotpedia
- Political Party: n/a
- Country: United States
- State/Locality: n/a
- Office: n/a
-
Email Providers:
- Litmus