1. 2013 U.S. Supreme Court Preview Sarah Edson, Esq. Mullen High School edson@mullenhigh.com

2. Agenda Previous term Background: Fisher v. University of Texas Background: Florida v. Jardines Moot Court Activity Classroom Materials Other cases to watch

3. Current Court

4. Chief Justice John Roberts, Bush (2005) Antonin Scalia, Reagan (1986) Anthony Kennedy, Reagan (1988) Clarence Thomas, Bush (1991) Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Clinton (1993) Stephen Breyer, Clinton (1994) Samuel Alito, Jr., Bush (2006) Sonia Sotomayor, Obama (2009) Elena Kagan, Obama (2010)

5. Supreme Court 2011-2012 Number of merit opinions: Number from state courts: Number from federal circuit courts: Of the federal courts, which circuit had the highest number? http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/06/SB_scorecard_OT11_final.pdf http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/06/SB_scorecard_OT11_final.pdf Which two justices had the highest agreement rate? Which two justices had the lowest agreement rate?

6. Of the merit opinions, how many were 9-0? How many were 5-4? Of the 5-4 decisions, which justice was in the majority the most? Who authored the most opinions (total)? Who authored the most 9-0 decisions?

7. Which majority opinion author had the fewest number of days between argument and opinion? Which Justice had the highest average number of questions? Which Justice had the highest frequency as the first questioner?

8. Last year’s cases U.S. v. Jones: Unanimous decision that the use of the GPS on a person’s car constituted a search and unconstitutional without a warrant Florence v. Burlington: 5-4 decision – suspicionless searches of inmates can be reasonable regardless of the offense

9. Fisher v. University of Texas Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 1978 Med School admissions policy: Regular admissions program “special” program for candidates who identified as minority – 16 spots in program reserved Supreme Court said program was a race-based classification and therefore applied strict scrutiny test Is the classification absolutely necessary to meet a compelling state interest? Court said no – held that race can be a “plus” but can’t be only factor and quotas are not valid

10. Gratz v. Bollinger, 2003 University of Michigan undergrad admissions policy (1995) had number of seats reserved for minorities 1998 policy changed to a 150-point selection index where various factors (including race/ethnicity) earned a candidate points Court (6-3) decision held that both policies were unconstitutional – process not individualized but rather mechanical Majority: Rehnquist, O’Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer Dissent: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg

11. Grutter v. Bollinger, 2003 University of Michigan Law School admissions policy considered race as a factor in deciding a student’s acceptance Court (5-4) held that student body diversity is a compelling state interest – a “critical mass” of students from underrepresented groups can enrich classroom discussion, produce cross-racial understanding, and break down racial stereotypes Law school admissions policy upheld Majority: O’Connor, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer Dissent: Rehnquist, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas

12. Florida v. Jardines U.S. v. Place, 1982 Dog sniff search of luggage at airport detected drugs Court (9-0) held that dog sniff is not a search Kyllo v. U.S., 2000 Thermal imaging of home detected areas of home were hotter than others, consistent with cultivation of marijuana Court (5-4) held that the use of thermal imaging was a search and therefore presumptively unreasonable without a warrant Majority: Scalia, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer Dissent: Rehnquist, Stevens, O’Connor, Kennedy

13. Illinois v. Caballes, 2004 During a traffic stop a drug-detection dog alerted the officer to presence of marijuana in car Court (6-2) upheld the search Majority: Stevens, O’Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer Dissent: Souter, Ginsburg

14. At your tables One case per table Identify Petitioner’s arguments Identify Respondent’s arguments Identify potential questions from Justices

15. Classroom Materials http://www.streetlaw.org/en/newsroom/Article/322 /2012_NCSS_Workshop_Materials http://www.streetlaw.org/en/newsroom/Article/322 /2012_NCSS_Workshop_Materials www.landmarkcases.org www.oyez.org www.scotusblog.com http://www.streetlaw.org/en/programs/supreme_co urt_summer_institute_for_teachers http://www.streetlaw.org/en/programs/supreme_co urt_summer_institute_for_teachers