-
Contributors
Blogroll
- Above The Law
- Althouse
- Balkinazation
- Becker-Posner Blog
- BLT: The Blog of Legal Times
- Concurring Opinions
- Dorf on Law
- How Appealing
- Law.Com
- Most Strongly Supported
- Prawfsblawg
- Prison Law Blog
- SCOTUS Blog
- Sentencing Law and Policy
- Text & History
- The Confrontation Blog
- The Volokh Conspiracy
- Wait A Second!
- Wall Street Journal Law Blog
Categories
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
The Cockle BurDisclaimer
Any commentary or opinions about cases, legal theory, legal strategy, court procedure, and all other content are the express opinion of their writer and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Cockle Law Brief Printing Co (“Cockle Law”), Cockle Bur, Inc. (“Cockle Bur”) its employees, owners, or users of this site. These commentary and opinions should be relied upon at your own risk. These commentary and opinions are not legal advice.
All information made available at www.Cocklebur.com is for informational purposes only. This website, and all content contained herein, is not meant to provide legal advice or answer specific legal question. It is not a substitute for legal advice. You should neither act, nor refrain from acting, based on information contained in this site; nor should you consider any blogs or other content posted on www.Cocklebur.com to be a substitute for proper legal research conducted by a licensed attorney. Visitors to this site should consult a licensed attorney before relying on any information found on this site.
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Cockle Law informs you that any U.S. federal tax advice or information contained in this site (including any blog post or on any site linked to or from www.Cocklebur.com) is not intended or written to be used, and can not be used, for the purpose of (I) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (II) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Monthly Archives: June 2011
Third Circuit Rules that Padilla v. Kentucky is Retroactively Applicable on Habeas
Tagged habeas corpus, new rule, Padilla v. Kentucky, prisoners, retroactivity, United States v. Orocio
The Third Circuit took the unusual step of declaring a Supreme Court opinion (Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S.Ct. 1473 (2010)) retroactively applicable to defedants filing habeas corpus motions. The case is United States v. Orocio and the opinion can be found here. For those who do not regularly follow post-conviction and habeas cases, federal courts [...]
Posted in Criminal Law ( 2 Comments)
Recent Court Opinions
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn., 08-1448 California passed a law regulating the sale and rental of violent video games to minors. The 9th Circuit declined to use the standard applied to laws restricting sexual obscenity, and instead struck down the law after a strict scrutiny examination. Writing for a diverse majority, Justice Scalia reasoned that [...]
Posted in Uncategorized ( Leave a comment)
Sackett: Do you have a right to court review of administrative commands?
The Supreme Court today agreed to hear a case brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation, to decide whether an Idaho couple, Michael and Chantell Sackett, have the right to judicial review of an EPA “compliance order” that forces them to remove certain improvements on their land or face tens of thousands of dollars in fines [...]
Posted in Uncategorized ( Comments closed)
Kagan Reverses Course in First Amendment/Video Game Case
Tagged Brown v. Entertainment Merchants' Association, dog fighting, First Amendment, Justice Elena Kagan, Solicitor General, Supreme Court, United States v. Stevens, video games
I remember when Steve Lubet questioned whether former Solicitor General Ted Olson should be allowed to argue that the federal campaign finance reform statute was unconstitutional in Citizens United, because, as Solicitor General, he had argued a contrary position. At the time, I didn’t understand why that mattered since “advocates represent clients,” not their personal [...]
Posted in Supreme Court ( 2 Comments)
Government’s CON job
The cover story of the new issue of Regulation magazine is my article on “Certificate of Necessity” (CON) laws, including the law that we’re challenging in the case of Missouri entrepreneur Michael Munie. CON laws are laws that require businesses to prove to a government agency that there’s a “public need” for a new business [...]
Posted in Uncategorized ( Comments closed)
Best of the Weekend
I read several great pieces over the weekend. Here are the best of them. University of Chicago Professor Geoffrey R. Stone had this New York Times op-ed entitled “Our Untransparent President.” Mr. Stone alleges that: “While Mr. Obama has taken certain steps, notably early in his administration, to scale back some of the Bush-era excesses, [...]
Posted in Opinions ( Leave a comment)
Recent Court Opinions
Stern v. Marshall, 10-179 This highly anticipated ruling, covered by E! Online and Access Hollywood, has finally established that bankruptcy court judges are not federal judges in the Article III sense, and therefore may not hear certain claims (C.J. Roberts wrote the opinion; J. Scalia filed a concurring opinion; J. Breyer filed a dissent, joined [...]
Posted in Uncategorized ( 1 Comment)
Go Go Gadget Arms: Why Justice Breyer Rightly Reached Out to Decide a Question Not Presented in Turner v. Rogers
Tagged child support, civil contempt, Justice Breyer, Justice Thomas, right to counsel, Seth Waxman, Supreme Court, Turner v. Rogers
Sometimes the Supreme Court reaches out to decide issues not raised in the petition for certiorari. It is a rare occurrence. But it happened in Turner v. Rogers, No. 10-10. If you weren’t following the case, here are the facts: Michael D. Turner racked up large debts owed to his child’s mother and the state [...]
Posted in Supreme Court ( 3 Comments)

US Sentencing Commission Votes for Retroactivity of Crack Cocaine Amendment