Link to today’s order list.
18-280 NY STATE RIFLE & PISTOL, ET AL. V. NEW YORK, NY, ET AL.
The Respondents’ Suggestion of Mootness is denied. The question of mootness will be subject to further consideration at oral argument, and the parties should be prepared to discuss it.
So we will at least reach oral arguments in the above case.
No new cases were added to the docket on this list.
Over 1,000 petitions were denied, most notably the following:
- Domino’s Pizza v. Robles , involving whether the accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to websites and apps;
- Miller v. Inslee , involving whether a state can require operators of state-subsidized home daycare centers to accept an exclusive bargaining agent to deal with the state on public-policy issues;
- Hall v. Merrill , involving whether and when a candidate for office can challenge a rule limiting access to the ballot when the election in which he wanted to run has already passed;
- Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk , involving overtime for hourly workers at Amazon fulfillment centers, who are seeking to be paid for time spent going through security screenings;
- County of San Diego v. Mann , a case arising from child-abuse allegations, in which the county had asked the justices to weigh in on the standard for holding municipalities liable in cases brought by parents, as well as when parental consent or a court order can be required for a child’s medical exam;
- Illinois v. Bonilla , involving whether police normally need a warrant to use a drug-sniffing dog in the area just outside an apartment door; and
- Zamudio v. United States , involving whether police have probable cause to search a home when a search warrant does not draw a specific connection between someone’s alleged drug trafficking and that person’s home.
And a bit of unfinished business from a thread I posted in August.
D-3052 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF MAURICE RUDOLPH FRANKS
Maurice Rudolph Franks, of Baker, Louisiana, having been suspended from the practice of law in this Court by order of August 23, 2019; and a rule having been issued and served upon him requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred; and a response having been filed;
It is ordered that Maurice Rudolph Franks is disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
This was the guy that was practicing law in Louisiana 29 full years AFTER being disbarred by Colorado for embezzling client funds.