Latest news with #UniversityofMichiganLawSchool
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Trump overshadows Supreme Court as ruling season begins
WASHINGTON — The beginning of June marks the start of the traditional monthlong ruling season at the Supreme Court, when the justices hand down decisions in their biggest and most contentious cases. But this year is different. President Donald Trump's second term has disrupted the court calendar, with the nine justices now spending as much time, if not more, juggling consequential emergency cases that need to be handled quickly as they do on the regular docket of cases that have gotten months of attention and deliberation. 'It underscores the degree to which Donald Trump and the Trump administration are sucking all of the oxygen out of the room,' said Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and the author of a new book about the court, 'Lawless.' This can affect the public's knowledge and understanding of what the court is doing in part because media organizations are used to devoting additional resources to coverage during June that are not necessarily available at other times of the year, she added. It also changes the normal rhythms of the court's operations. The court announces ahead of time when rulings in argued cases are expected, and they are always issued at 10 a.m. But emergency decisions can drop at any time of day, with no advance notice. One recent decision was released in the early hours of a Saturday morning. Nearly all the emergency cases are related to the administration's aggressive interpretations of federal law in executive orders that have regularly been blocked by federal judges. As June begins, the Supreme Court has 33 cases to decide out of 62 on the so-called merits docket. Those are the cases in which the justices heard arguments in the current nine-month term, which started in October, and would be expected to decide by issuing lengthy written decisions. The next scheduled ruling day is Thursday. In the meantime, the court since January has already issued rulings of some description in 11 Trump-related emergency cases via what has been dubbed the 'shadow docket,' and it has several others pending. These are cases in which the justices do not generally hear oral arguments, and they are often decided by brief court orders without the lengthy, detailed reasoning associated with major Supreme Court decisions. But the shadow docket decisions can be just as practically important as the cases decided on the merits docket, sparking concerns about transparency and process. Via the shadow docket, the court has already allowed Trump's ban on transgender people in the military to go into effect, given a green light to the firing of independent agency members, and approved the administration's removal of legal protections for thousands of Venezuelan immigrants. The justices have also put the brakes on an attempt by the administration to use a wartime law to deport Venezuelans it claims are gang members and ordered Trump to 'facilitate' the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was wrongly sent to El Salvador. On Friday, the court allowed the Trump administration to revoke legal protections for more than 500,000 immigrants. In the meantime, the docket of merits cases has a relatively small number of headline-grabbing cases compared with previous years. Of those cases yet to be decided, the biggest is a challenge to a Tennessee law that bans gender transition care for minors. The court is also set to rule on a conservative religious objection to LGBTQ-themed books in a Maryland county's schools and an effort by Texas to restrict access to pornographic websites. By comparison, last June, the court's rulings included one granting Trump broad immunity from prosecution for events that took place during his first term as president, a trio of rulings that weakened federal agency power, a decision upholding a law that bars domestic abusers from possessing guns, and another rejecting a challenge to the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. In the summer of 2023, the court within a matter of days ended affirmative action in college admissions and killed President Joe Biden's student loan debt relief plan. And the previous summer, the court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion rights decision. 'The emergency docket seems to have almost swallowed the court's merits docket over the past month or so,' said Greg Garre, a Washington lawyer who regularly argues cases at the court. One case he argued, concerning Oklahoma's attempt to launch the first religious public charter school, was poised to be one of the biggest of the term. But it ended up fizzling when the court deadlocked 4-4. In fact, some cases that arise as emergency applications have ended up being converted into merits cases, creating what some view as a 'rocket docket' — that is, major cases zooming immediately to the high court instead of taking months or years to navigate the normal appeals process. 'In a few years, we may no longer be able to say that the emergency docket is an 'irregular' procedure. It might become the normal procedure for all high-stakes litigation,' said William Baude, a University of Chicago Law School professor who coined the 'shadow docket' phrase. One high-profile example was the court's January decision upholding a law that was intended to ban TikTok if its Chinese owner did not immediately sell it. The Supreme Court resolved the entire case within weeks after it reached the court via an emergency appeal. The court also elected to hear oral arguments in a trio of shadow docket cases concerning nationwide injunctions issued by judges that blocked Trump's plan to end birthright citizenship, in a further blurring of the regular merits docket and the fast-moving shadow docket. Some Supreme Court watchers have speculated that the justices deliberately kept their merits docket relatively light this term, knowing that there was the possibility of election-related cases in the fall and a potential wave of Trump-related cases if he won the election, based on what happened in his first term. 'I definitely feel like the court is reserving space in its schedule for emergency docket cases involving Trump administration initiatives,' said John Elwood, another lawyer who argues cases at the court. This article was originally published on
NBC News
02-06-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
Trump overshadows Supreme Court as ruling season begins
WASHINGTON — The beginning of June marks the start of the traditional monthlong ruling season at the Supreme Court, when the justices hand down decisions in their biggest and most contentious cases. But this year is different. President Donald Trump's second term has disrupted the court calendar, with the nine justices now spending as much time, if not more, juggling consequential emergency cases that need to be handled quickly as they do on the regular docket of cases that have gotten months of attention and deliberation. 'It underscores the degree to which Donald Trump and the Trump administration are sucking all of the oxygen out of the room,' said Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and the author of a new book about the court, 'Lawless.' This can affect the public's knowledge and understanding of what the court is doing in part because media organizations are used to devoting additional resources to coverage during June that are not necessarily available at other times of the year, she added. It also changes the normal rhythms of the court's operations. The court announces ahead of time when rulings in argued cases are expected, and they are always issued at 10 a.m. But emergency decisions can drop at any time of day, with no advance notice. One recent decision was released in the early hours of a Saturday morning. Nearly all the emergency cases are related to the administration's aggressive interpretations of federal law in executive orders that have regularly been blocked by federal judges. As June begins, the Supreme Court has 33 cases to decide out of 62 on the so-called merits docket. Those are the cases in which the justices heard arguments in the current nine-month term, which started in October, and would be expected to decide by issuing lengthy written decisions. The next scheduled ruling day is Thursday. In the meantime, the court since January has already issued rulings of some description in 11 Trump-related emergency cases via what has been dubbed the 'shadow docket,' and it has several others pending. These are cases in which the justices do not generally hear oral arguments, and they are often decided by brief court orders without the lengthy, detailed reasoning associated with major Supreme Court decisions. But the shadow docket decisions can be just as practically important as the cases decided on the merits docket, sparking concerns about transparency and process. This term's big Supreme Court decisions Via the shadow docket, the court has already allowed Trump's ban on transgender people in the military to go into effect, given a green light to the firing of independent agency members, and approved the administration's removal of legal protections for thousands of Venezuelan immigrants. The justices have also put the brakes on an attempt by the administration to use a wartime law to deport Venezuelans it claims are gang members and ordered Trump to 'facilitate' the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was wrongly sent to El Salvador. On Friday, the court allowed the Trump administration to revoke legal protections for more than 500,000 immigrants. In the meantime, the docket of merits cases has a relatively small number of headline-grabbing cases compared with previous years. Of those cases yet to be decided, the biggest is a challenge to a Tennessee law that bans gender transition care for minors. The court is also set to rule on a conservative religious objection to LGBTQ-themed books in a Maryland county's schools and an effort by Texas to restrict access to pornographic websites. By comparison, last June, the court's rulings included one granting Trump broad immunity from prosecution for events that took place during his first term as president, a trio of rulings that weakened federal agency power, a decision upholding a law that bars domestic abusers from possessing guns, and another rejecting a challenge to the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. In the summer of 2023, the court within a matter of days ended affirmative action in college admissions and killed President Joe Biden's student loan debt relief plan. And the previous summer, the court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion rights decision. How the shadow docket is changing the court 'The emergency docket seems to have almost swallowed the court's merits docket over the past month or so,' said Greg Garre, a Washington lawyer who regularly argues cases at the court. One case he argued, concerning Oklahoma's attempt to launch the first religious public charter school, was poised to be one of the biggest of the term. But it ended up fizzling when the court deadlocked 4-4. In fact, some cases that arise as emergency applications have ended up being converted into merits cases, creating what some view as a 'rocket docket' — that is, major cases zooming immediately to the high court instead of taking months or years to navigate the normal appeals process. 'In a few years, we may no longer be able to say that the emergency docket is an 'irregular' procedure. It might become the normal procedure for all high-stakes litigation,' said William Baude, a University of Chicago Law School professor who coined the 'shadow docket' phrase. One high-profile example was the court's January decision upholding a law that was intended to ban TikTok if its Chinese owner did not immediately sell it. The Supreme Court resolved the entire case within weeks after it reached the court via an emergency appeal. The court also elected to hear oral arguments in a trio of shadow docket cases concerning nationwide injunctions issued by judges that blocked Trump's plan to end birthright citizenship, in a further blurring of the regular merits docket and the fast-moving shadow docket. Some Supreme Court watchers have speculated that the justices deliberately kept their merits docket relatively light this term, knowing that there was the possibility of election-related cases in the fall and a potential wave of Trump-related cases if he won the election, based on what happened in his first term. 'I definitely feel like the court is reserving space in its schedule for emergency docket cases involving Trump administration initiatives,' said John Elwood, another lawyer who argues cases at the court.
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
University of Michigan Law School grad wins 'Survivor.' What to know about winner
This story has been updated with additional information. The latest champion of CBS's long-running show "Survivor" revealed to his competitors on the season finale Wednesday, May 21, that he is a University of Michigan Law School graduate shortly before they voted to award him $1 million in prize money. Kyle Fraser, the newest "Survivor" champion, is a former teacher, and then graduated from the University of Michigan Law School in 2021. The 31-year old won the 48th season, which was set in Fiji. The finale aired on May 21. Fraser beat fellow finalists Joe Hunter and Eva Erickson in a 5-2-1 vote. The season marks the third straight that a person with Michigan ties was the winner. Last season, Rachel LaMont, a Southfield, Michigan, native, was the winner. Mackenzie "Kenzie" Alayna Petty, a Gibralter, Michigan, native, won "Survivor" 46 the season before. Fraser kept the fact that he was an attorney a secret from other players until the finale. He spoke also about being previously jailed as a youth for what he calls non-violent misdemeanors, sharing his experience on the show and on his Instagram page. "I think it goes to show how the criminal legal system can affect the lives of so many more people than you could possibly imagine. I take responsibility for everything in my life, the good and the bad," Fraser said on Instagram. Fraser however noted the experience shaped who he is today. He received his juris doctorate from the University of Michigan Law School in 2021, serving as senior editor for the Michigan Law Review. Additionally, he was awarded the Irving Stenn Jr. and Carl Gussin Memorial prizes at graduation, according to his law firm bio, which says he rejoined Morvillo Abramowitz as an associate in 2024. He had previously worked at the firm before leaving to clerk for R. Guy Cole Jr. in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Fraser earned his bachelor's degree from Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia. He currently lives in Brooklyn, New York, but is from Roanoke, Virginia, according to Entertainment Weekly. If you missed it live, "Survivor" streams on Paramount+ and on the CBS website. New episodes air live on CBS as well as Paramount+. The five players remaining at the start of the May 21 episode included: Eva Erickson, a 24-year-old doctoral candidate living in Providence, Rhode Island Kyle Fraser, a 31-year-old attorney residing in Brooklyn, New York Mitch Guerra, a 34-year-old physical education coach living in Waco, Texas Joe Hunter, a 45-year-old fire captain living in West Sacramento, California Kamilla Karthigesu, a 31-year-old software engineer living in Foster City, California Season 49 airs this fall, also set in Fiji. This year celebrates the 25th anniversary for "Survivor." An official release date has not been announced yet. Rachel LaMont won Season 47 of "Survivor," in a 7-1-0 vote over Sam Phalen, who got one vote, and Sue Smey. Lamont, a 34-year-old graphic designer from Southfield, Michigan, was originally on the Gata tribe and became the fifth woman ever to win four individual immunity challenges in a season. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Kyle Fraser, University of Michigan Law School grad, is the newest 'Survivor'
Miami Herald
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Washtenaw County prosecutor joins Michigan attorney general race
LANSING, Mich. − Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit is entering the 2026 race for state's chief law enforcement officer, throwing his hat in the ring for Michigan attorney general. The 42-year-old Ann Arbor Democrat who started his career as a public school teacher said on his campaign website that he will "take on corporate polluters, protect workers and consumers from exploitation, and hold powerful interests accountable." "At a time when our constitutional rights are under attack, Eli will be a fearless advocate for justice, fairness, and opportunity for all," the site said. Savit worked as a law clerk to former U.S. Supreme Court justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O'Connor and legal counsel for the city of Detroit before he was elected Washtenaw County prosecutor in 2020. He was re-elected to the position in 2024 and currently lectures at the University of Michigan Law School. As prosecutor, Savit created the state's only Economic Justice Unit, focused on price gouging, wage theft and consumer abuse, as well as zeroed in prosecutorial efforts on domestic violence and sexual assault cases, his campaign announcement said. In Tuesday's announcement, Savit said the attorney general's office needs to focus its efforts on abuses close to home − such as slumlords and scammers − and at the federal level, where he argued Trump "is seeking to strip our communities of their fundamental freedoms." "The attorney general is uniquely situated to fight back, in court, against federal overreach," Savit said. "And I'll do so whenever Michiganders are placed at risk." His endorsements include that of former Michigan Democratic Party Chairwoman Lavora Barnes, Genesee County Prosecutor David Leyton and state Sen. Stephanie Chang, D-Detroit. Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel is term-limited and serving her last four-year term. Savit joins two others who have already announced their candidacy for the statewide role: Defense attorney Kevin Kijewski, a Republican, and former U.S. Attorney Mark Totten, a Democrat. --------- Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
CBS News
13-05-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Eli Savit announces candidacy for Michigan Attorney General
Repairs to Belle Isle fountain; financial impact of tariffs; and more top stories Repairs to Belle Isle fountain; financial impact of tariffs; and more top stories Repairs to Belle Isle fountain; financial impact of tariffs; and more top stories Washtenaw County prosecutor Eli Savit, a Democrat, has announced his campaign for the 2026 Michigan Attorney General race. Michigan's current state attorney general Dana Nessel, a Democrat, is facing term limits and is unable to run for re-election. Attorney Mark Totten, also a Democrat, announced his candidacy in April. "At a time when our constitutional rights are under attack, Eli will be a fearless advocate for justice, fairness, and opportunity for all," Savit's campaign announcement said. Savit was born and raised in Ann Arbor. He attended Kalamazoo College, where he played basketball. After college graduation, he worked as a public school teacher both in special education and eighth-grade U.S. history. After graduation from University of Michigan Law School, Savit worked for two federal judges. He then clerked at the U.S. Supreme Court for Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As senior legal counsel for the City of Detroit, Savit oversaw the city's lawsuits against the opioid industry and led the right-to-literacy lawsuit on behalf of Detroit students. He also worked on a negotiating team that secured nearly $100 million in funding for Detroit schools. He also served as the top lawyer in international negotiations that facilitated the construction of the Gordie Howe International Bridge between Michigan and Ontario. Savit was elected Washtenaw County prosecuting attorney in 2020 and re-elected in 2024. In that role, he created special teams that included an economic justice unit and investigated "cold case" rape incidents. He also established the county's integrity and expungement unit, giving over 1,000 residents who met the requirements a chance at clearing old records. Other projects included litigating on behalf of the ACLU, the American Association of University Women, and the League of Women Voters to challenge the Michigan Legislature's adopt-and-amend strategy that was invoked upon a voter-approved measure on paid sick leave and a boosted minimum wage. In addition to his work as a prosecutor, he is a lecturer at the University of Michigan Law School.
