Morning Docket: 12.14.23

* Big day of Supreme Court news as the justices consider curtailing the reach of obstruction charges in January 6 cases in a move that must delight Capitol riot cheerleader Ginni Thomas. [Politico]

* Throw the mifepristone restrictions case on there too so they can overturn Chevron and declare food and drug safety unconstitutional for naked political reasons too. [National Law Journal]

* And the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling driving law schools to abandon admissions tests entirely to avoid metrics that can be cherrypicked in future challenges. [Reuters]

* Federal Circuit argues that Judge Pauline Newman’s lawsuit challenging the circuit’s suspension is moot because they’ve lifted the suspension and there’s no risk that the judge could fall behind on opinions again because they’re going to keep her suspended from hearing cases and actual judges committed this reasoning to paper and have the gall to question someone else’s acuity. [Law360]

* An AI story with a Mr. Roboto reference. Well played. [Bloomberg Law News]

* Legal tech requires lawyers and engineers to talk to each other. That should be obvious, but maybe it wasn’t. [Forbes]

* SBF lawyer agrees that his client sucked on the stand. [Futurism]

The post Morning Docket: 12.14.23 appeared first on Above the Law.

Related Articles


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *