For those less familiar with the U.S. Supreme Court, this brief (and admittedly over-generalized) history of the Court might shed some light on why Republicans are pulling out all the stops to block President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland—and on why the upcoming election, not just for the presidency but also for control of the senate, is so historically pivotal. It is no exaggeration to say that 2016 could mark the dawn of a new era.
There’s a split over the significance of parental intent in resolving habitual-residence questions, under the Hague Convention’s protections against international child abduction. See here at p.11 n.3.
Circuits disagree as to whether state or federal law governs a dispute over a post-office lease. See here at p.6.
In determining personal jurisdiction, there’s a split over using the “stream of commerce” or the “stream of commerce plus” approach. See here at p.5.
There’s a split over whether assault is an element of every conviction for resisting arrest. See here at p.12-13.
There’s a split over whether “back pay” is available as an equitable remedy under ERISA, in a claim for retaliation. See here at p.19 n.3.
And the circuits disagree over the compatibility of the FDCPA and the Bankruptcy Code. See here at p.31-32.