Opinion Obervations + New Certs + Final Thoughts on This Week's Oral Arguments

OVERVIEW

Don't miss this action packed episode. In it, we cover three things:

1. News that the Supreme Court agreed to hear 4 new cases;
2. News that the Supreme Court will issue opinions
3. Stats, trends, and observations of last week's 4 opinions; and
4. Final thoughts on this week's oral arguments

NEW CERTIORARI GRANTS

Cases Added: Four new grants bring total to approximately 57 unique cases for the term

1. Geofence Warrants Case: Constitutional challenge to warrants allowing police access to cell phone user data by specific date, time, and location
2. Patent Infringement Case: Intellectual property dispute involving patent protection standards
3. Monsanto/Roundup Case: Product liability challenge over failure to warn about cancer dangers
4. Investment Fund Case: Securities litigation involving pleading standards for fund underperformance claims

Term Outlook: Current case count (57 unique cases) approaches last term's 62-63 cases, suggesting limited additional grants expected

JANUARY 20TH OPINIONS FORTHCOMING

Release Schedule: Supreme Court plans opinion release on Monday, January 20th Coverage Plan: Detailed opinion breakdowns scheduled for Thursday or Friday depending on volume Anticipation: Multiple pending cases await resolution from previous oral argument sessions

SCOTUS OPINION TRENDS & STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Reversal Patterns: Current term mirrors historical 69% reversal rate

1. 3 reversals/vacates vs. 1 affirmance from first four decisions
2. Montana Supreme Court decision upheld; federal circuit courts overturned

Vote Distributions: Early decisions show typical voting patterns

1. 2 unanimous (9-0) decisions: Barrett v. United States, Case v. Montana
2. 1 decision 7-2, 1 decision 5-4
3. 3 criminal law cases, 1 standing/election case

Authorship Patterns: Different justices authored each majority opinion

1. Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson wrote majorities
2. Gorsuch most active: 2 concurrences, 1 dissent
3. Jackson 2nd most active: 1 majority, 1 dissent

Judicial Fracturing Analysis: Early emergence of fractured reasoning despite agreement on outcomes

1. Notable example: Bost v. Illinois where Barrett and Kagan joined conclusion but rejected reasoning
2. Barrett criticized majority's "bespoke standing rule for candidates"
3. Fracturing expected to intensify in major constitutional cases

Legislative History Debate: Emerging doctrinal battle over legislative history usage

1. Barrett v. United States highlights split: Jackson's Part IV-C attracted only 4 votes (Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan)
2. Textualist justices (Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett) rejected legislative history reliance
3. Roberts' surprising support suggests institutional concerns over methodological purity

FINAL THOUGHTS ON UPCOMING CASESTRUMP V. COOK - Federal Reserve Governor Removal

Strategic Innovation: Cook's supplemental brief marshaling amicus arguments demonstrates tactical genius

1. Adam Feldman's research shows increasing academic influence in Supreme Court decisions
2. Oral arguments provide inadequate forum for addressing comprehensive written amicus submissions
3. Supplemental briefs fill procedural gap allowing systematic written response to third-party interventions

Core Constitutional Themes:

1. Judicial Restraint: Courts must enforce only what Congress actually wrote, not judicial interpretations of congressional intent
2. "For Cause" Protection: Risk of rendering statutory protections meaningless if presidents can fabricate misconduct allegations

Trump Tariff Connection: Parallel arguments about congressional authorization requirements

1. Government previously argued against broad executive authority in tariff context
2. Now uses same textual arguments to deny Cook's statutory process rights
3. Constitutional consistency demands similar outcomes across separation of powers cases

Broader Implications: Potential elimination of congressional removal statute authority if combined with Trump v. Slaughter FTC ruling

WOLFORD V. LOPEZ - Second Amendment Property Rights

Constitutional Framework: Hawaii's 2023 "vampire rule" requiring owner consent for armed entry onto private property

1. Similar laws in California, Maryland, New York, New Jersey
2. Post-Bruen constitutional analysis requires historical tradition support

Property Rights Clash: Fundamental tension between property owner exclusion rights and Second Amendment protections

1. Hawaii invokes English law's "sole and despotic dominion" property principle
2. Gun owners argue state cannot criminalize conduct where property owners remain silent
3. Distinguishes between property owner choice and state mandate

Strategic Burden: Hawaii must prove constitutionality under strict scrutiny post-Bruen framework

1. Historical tradition analysis favors gun rights absent clear precedent
2. Five-vote majority appears unlikely given current Court composition

M & K EMPLOYEE SOLUTIONS V. IAM PENSION FUND - Pension Calculation Timing

Main Issue: Whether pension plans can retroactively apply new calculation methods

Restaurant Analogy: Changing menu prices after meal consumption parallels pension calculation timing Stakes: Fundamental contract interpretation affecting employer obligations and pension security

Related Resources:

1. Adam Feldman, "The Rise of Scholars' Amicus Briefs," Legalytics, available at https://legalytics.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-scholars-amicus-briefs
2. The High Court Report, "January Mega Preview Episode - Transgender Sports, Gun Rights, and Fed Firings," available at https://scotus-oral-arguments.captivate.fm/episode/january-mega-preview-episode-transgender-sports-gun-rights-and-fed-firings/
3. The High Court Report, "Six Pack of Takeaways + Prediction: Trump v. Slaughter," available at