Steve Vladeck

@stevevladeck.bsky.social

188

Posts

Karen’s husband; father of daughters; Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law; SCOTUS nerd for CNN.

SCOTUS newsletter: stevevladeck.substack.com

New book: tinyurl.com/shadowdocket

Posts Replies Media

In today’s “One First,” me on how #SCOTUS’s four big end-of-term administrative law rulings may not portend the *demise* of the administrative state, but they’ll create massive *instability* with regard to a dizzying array of agency actions—new and old: www.stevevladeck.com/p/89-destabi...

89. Destabilizing the Administrative Statewww.stevevladeck.com The Supreme Court's major end-of-term rulings don't augur the *demise* of administrative agencies, but they *do* throw open the floodgates to new challenges even to long-settled agency actions

In today’s (bonus) “One First,” me on how the Trump immunity ruling is just one example from this #SCOTUS Term of Chief Justice Roberts turning away from institutional moderation—a move that will have implications *far* beyond presidential accountability: www.stevevladeck.com/p/bonus-88-c...

Bonus 88: Chief Justice Roberts Turns Rightwww.stevevladeck.com The Trump immunity ruling was a fitting capstone to a term defined by the Chief Justice's sharp turn away from institutional moderation—a shift that could potentially have cataclysmic effects.

Via my #SCOTUS newsletter, "One First," I'll be hosting a live Supreme Court-themed #AMA tonight from 8:30–9:30 ET: www.stevevladeck.com/p/tonight-83... I'll try to answer your questions about the Trump immunity ruling; the rest of this rather momentous term; and other Court-related topics.

Tonight @ 8:30 ET: Live SCOTUS AMAwww.stevevladeck.com I'll be answering your questions about the Supreme Court, including but not limited to today's ruling in the Trump immunity case, from 8:30–9:30 ET tonight.

Today’s “One First” looks back at last week’s #SCOTUS news and looks ahead to what’s expected today—not just the rulings coming down starting at 10 ET, but the quietly significant Order List we expect from the “Cleanup Conference” later this afternoon: www.stevevladeck.com/p/88-the-cle...

88. The Cleanup Conferencewww.stevevladeck.com After the major rulings we expect this morning, the justices will release a series of other rulings later this afternoon that won't get as much attention—even if some of them should

In a special Friday issue of "One First," I take a look ahead to the 6–8 decisions still to come from #SCOTUS starting (but not ending) at 10:00 ET today—and the best guesses for which justice might be writing the majority opinion in each of them: www.stevevladeck.com/p/87-and-the...

87. And Then There Were Six(ish)www.stevevladeck.com With more decisions coming today at 10 ET, a quick preview of the remaining 6–8 Supreme Court decisions, with some speculation about which justice was assigned the majority opinion in each case

Today’s bonus issue of “One First” (for paid subscribers) looks at #SCOTUS’s apparent ruling in the Idaho emergency abortion case—and the lessons it has both for why the Court intervened *at all,* and how it came to be that it was inadvertently posted: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-86-t...

Bonus 86: The EMTALA Glitchstevevladeck.substack.com The accidentally disclosed punt in the Idaho emergency abortion case calls into question the Court's handling of that appeal—along with its insistence that decisions are released "when they're ready"

This week’s “One First” recaps a busy week of opinions from #SCOTUS, and looks ahead to what we know (and what I *think*) about the timing and mechanics of the 12–14 major rulings that the Court has left before its summer recess: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/86-whats-l...

86. What's Left for OT2023stevevladeck.substack.com Even after handing down nine decisions last week, the justices still have a lot to resolve before rising for their summer recess. Here's what we know for sure, and what I think, about what comes next.

Today's bonus issue of "One First" (for paid subscribers) looks at the core disagreement among those advocating for #SCOTUS reform: Should the goal be to permanently weaken the Court, or to push for accountability reforms that would enhance its credibility? stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-85-b...

Bonus 85: Bury the Court or Praise It?stevevladeck.substack.com Reflections on whether Supreme Court reform should aim to diminish the Court's power, to shore it up by making the Court more accountable, or some combination of both.

After recapping last week’s six rulings, this week’s “One First” looks at the mechanics of opinion announcements at #SCOTUS—and why, now that the Court is live-streaming every oral argument, it ought to also be live-streaming the hand-downs, as well: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/85-opinion...

85. Opinion Announcements (and Why They Should Be Live-Streamed)stevevladeck.substack.com Justice Sotomayor's oral dissent in the bump stocks case highlights why the Supreme Court should allow those who can't be in the courtroom to hear the justices' hand-down statements.

I accidentally hit send last night, but here’s this week’s bonus issue of “One First”—an in-depth look at the 29(ish) rulings still expected from #SCOTUS, some of which we’ll get as early as 10:00 EDT this morning: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-83-2...

Bonus 83: 29 Down, 29(ish) To Go...stevevladeck.substack.com Later today, the Court will pass the halfway mark for rulings in cases argued during OT2023. Here's an in-depth look at what's left, along with some speculation about who might be writing

In Thornell, #SCOTUS didn’t just clarify the standard for ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims; six justices *applied* that standard rather than remanding so lower courts could. In today’s “One First,” I look at why that’s such a troubling move: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/83-when-sh...

83. When Should the Court Go First?stevevladeck.substack.com When a lower court used the wrong legal standard, when should the justices remand to apply the right one versus applying it themselves? That was the key dispute in last Thursday's ruling in Thornell

Today’s issue of “One First” uses the appointment of a new Supreme Court Librarian to explore Congress’s power to create and regulate the Supreme Court’s four “officers”—and what it could mean for creating a fifth: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/82-the-sup...

82. The Supreme Court's Four Officersstevevladeck.substack.com A new Supreme Court librarian provides an opportunity to look at the Court's role in appointing its own officers—and how that might play into proposals to create an Article III Inspector General

Today’s bonus issue of “One First” looks at the Alito flag stories through the lens of judicial humility. Humility is an important component of judicial credibility—and, as Justice Alito’s responses to these stories make clear, it’s completely lacking here: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-81-w...

Bonus 81: Why Judicial Humility Mattersstevevladeck.substack.com The biggest issue isn't the flags that the Alitos have flown outside their homes; it's that Justice Alito apparently doesn't think it's an issue in the first place

Today is the paperback publication date for “The Shadow Docket”—including a brand-new preface on how events of the past year underscore the need to look at #SCOTUS’s work far more holistically. @BasicBooks is offering 20% off with the code "VLADECK24": tinyurl.com/shadowdocketpb

For this week’s regular issue of “One First,” I wrote about last week’s CFPB and Louisiana redistricting rulings—and some of the difficulties that can arise from efforts to categorize #SCOTUS based on individual decisions (and a shifting baseline): stevevladeck.substack.com/p/81-how-to-...

81. How to Describe *This* Courtstevevladeck.substack.com The Supreme Court's two biggest rulings last week tee up an important but complicated question: What's the right way to contextualize major rulings that divide the justices in unexpected ways?

Today’s “One First” takes a deep dive into the pending emergency applications respecting Louisiana’s congressional redistricting—and, among other things, how they provide #SCOTUS an opportunity to be consistent in how/when it intervenes in election cases: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/80-louisia...

80. Louisiana's Congressional Map Comes Back to the Courtstevevladeck.substack.com Two overlapping emergency applications are once again asking the justices to effectively decide which party will control one of Louisiana's six House seats

Today’s bonus issue of “One First” looks at the “Good Neighbor” ozone pollution cases—emergency applications that have now been pending at #SCOTUS for 209 days—and what the timing says about how the justices are handling their “emergency” docket: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-79-a...

Bonus 79: A Seven-Month-Long Emergency?stevevladeck.substack.com The Supreme Court may decide the "Good Neighbor" ozone pollution emergency applications as early as today. It says quite a lot about the "emergency" docket that it's taken this long.

For today’s “One First,” a look at the 42(ish) decisions that we expect from #SCOTUS over the next eight weeks—and some of the real costs of the justices compressing so many major decisions into a window that’s so short (and only getting shorter): stevevladeck.substack.com/p/79-43ish-d...

79. 42(ish) Decisions to Go...stevevladeck.substack.com With scheduled arguments for the October 2023 Term in the rearview mirror, an overview of the work that the Supreme Court has in front of it over the next eight(-plus) weeks

Hey y'all! The paperback edition of "The Shadow Docket" drops on May 21—and includes a brand-new preface on how events of the past year underscore the need to look at #SCOTUS more holistically. @BasicBooks is offering 20% off with the code "VLADECK24": tinyurl.com/shadowdocketpb

At last week’s Trump immunity argument, Justice Gorsuch defended the focus on hypotheticals because the Court is “writing a rule for the ages.” Today’s “One First” explains why that’s the exact problem with how #SCOTUS appears to be approaching this case: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/78-writing...

78. "Writing a Rule ... for the Ages"stevevladeck.substack.com The real problem with Thursday's argument in the Trump immunity case is the extent to which it reveals a Supreme Court poised to paint itself into a deeply problematic (and unnecessary) corner

In today’s bonus issue of “One First” (for paid subscribers), I have some … thoughts … about yesterday’s #SCOTUS argument in the Idaho/EMTALA emergency abortion case—and why you should not just *read* about it, but *listen* to it: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-77-w...

With #SCOTUS set to hear oral argument later today on the relationship between EMTALA and state abortion bans, here’s my “One First” post from January summarizing the issue—and the potential implications of this dispute for *all* emergency medical care: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-60-e...

Bonus 60: EMTALA, Abortion, and the Courtstevevladeck.substack.com The justices will soon have to resolve if (and when) federal law allows emergency room doctors to perform otherwise unlawful abortions—with implications that could go well beyond reproductive rights

Justice Gorsuch is right that nationwide relief has become too pervasive. But his concurrence in the Idaho transgender medical care case never considers why it might *sometimes* be appropriate—or the cases when he voted in favor of it. New via “One First”: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/77-justice...

77. Justice Gorsuch and "Nationwide" Injunctionsstevevladeck.substack.com Justice Gorsuch is right to be wary of relief that benefits non-parties. But as his latest opinion underscores, he's inconsistent in when it bothers him and wrong about how big a problem it really is.

In today’s “One First” bonus issue (for paid subscribers), me on what’s right—and what’s wrong—with Justice Kavanaugh’s defense of #SCOTUS’s approach to emergency applications in his opinion re: Idaho’s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-76-j...

Bonus 76: Justice Kavanaugh's Defense of the Shadow Docketstevevladeck.substack.com In a 13-page concurrence defending the Court's recent behavior respecting emergency applications, Justice Kavanaugh failed to engage with some of the central critiques of that behavior.

#BREAKING: Over public dissents from Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, #SCOTUS puts Idaho’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender adolescents back *into* effect while a district court injunction blocking that law is appealed: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...

www.supremecourt.gov

Lots of conversations about #SCOTUS reform talk past each other. Today's "One First" takes a step back and groups possible reforms into three different categories—in an effort to distinguish among them based upon legality, plausibility, and desirability: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/76-a-taxon...

76. A Taxonomy for Court Reformstevevladeck.substack.com There are lots of different proposals out there for how Congress could seek to reform the Supreme Court. In general, they fall into three very different (albeit sometimes overlapping) categories.

So far, #SCOTUS has only *two* cases on its docket for the October 2024 Term. This week’s bonus issue of “One First” (for paid subscribers) looks at how far behind the Court is; explanations for why; & how this underscores the need to discuss docket reform: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-75-w...

Bonus 75: Where Have All the Cert. Grants Gone?stevevladeck.substack.com The Court has only two cases on its docket so far for the October 2024 Term. That's low even by the justices' recent standards—and further evidence of the need for serious docket reform discussions

Today’s “One First” uses last week’s #SCOTUS proposal of amendments to the Federal Rules of Appellate, Bankruptcy, and Civil Procedure and Evidence to take a longer look at the Court’s formal rulemaking power—and the questions that it continues to raise: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/75-the-sup...

75. The Supreme Court's (Formal) Rulemaking Powerstevevladeck.substack.com Four new proposals from the Supreme Court provide a useful opportunity for a deeper dive into the source of, and debates over, the rulemaking powers that Congress has delegated to the Court

In today’s bonus “One First” (for paid subscribers), I look at Peter Navarro’s request to have Justice Gorsuch grant the same relief Chief Justice Roberts denied, why the rule authorizing such shopping is anachronistic, and why #SCOTUS should repeal it: stevevladeck.substack.com/p/bonus-74-s...

Bonus 74: Shopping for Justicesstevevladeck.substack.com A new emergency request from Peter Navarro highlights an old quirk in the Supreme Court's rules—one of several anachronisms left over from before the Court moved to a

During last week’s mifepristone argument, Justice Alito repeatedly pressed Solicitor General Prelogar on what it would mean if no one has standing to challenge FDA drug approvals. Today’s “One First” explains why, coming from Alito, that’s a little rich. stevevladeck.substack.com/p/74-someone...

74.stevevladeck.substack.com Justice Alito's concern during the mifepristone argument that courts might not be able to hear challenges to every unlawful federal government action rings more than a little hollow