Today in Supreme Court History: July 17, 1862

7/17/1862:  Congress enacts the Confiscation Act, which empowers the government to seize the property of the rebels. The Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of that law in The Confiscation Cases (1873).

The Chase Court (1873)

Comments

[Martinned]

Cliffhanger?

[Dan Schiavetta]

?

[Martinned]

I'm sure we're all dying to find out what happened when the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of this law.

[Mr. Bumble]

Unusual for Reason that no one has chimed in. Wonder if the Court bypassed the constitutionality question and just ruled on the cases.

[Rise of the Impedance]

You won't believe what happens next!

[Dan Schiavetta]

Rubin v. United States, 524 U.S. 1301 (decided July 17, 1998): Rehnquist denied motion to stay subpoenas for testimony of Secret Service officers as to what they overheard Clinton say in regard to the matters Kenneth Starr was investigating; Rehnquist concedes that "confidentiality" and "the physical safety of the President" are implicated, and assumes for the purpose of the motion that cert would be granted, but then denies the application on the grounds that the Circuit Court's decision requiring compliance would be affirmed (?). Cert was denied, 525 U.S. 990, with strong dissents from Breyer and Ginsburg noting the history of Secret Service agents in close proximity to the President (and within earshot) foiling assassination attempts

Benten v. Kessler, 505 U.S. 1084 (decided July 17, 1992): rejecting pregnant woman's request for return of the French abortion pill RU-486, which had been confiscated when she entered the country

Reproductive Services, Inc. v. Walker, 439 U.S. 1307 (decided July 17, 1978): in this abortion case involving medical malpractice and false advertising, where records as to five other patients had been subpoenaed, Brennan stayed Texas court proceedings pending filing of a cert petition because the parties could not agree on keeping the patients' names confidential. Brennan says that the issue presented -- whether patient names can be obtained without a protective order -- would merit granting cert, but cert was in fact denied on jurisdictional grounds, 439 U.S. 1133 (1979).

[DaivdBehar]

What trivial garbage cases these government workers are wasting time and money on.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

You'd rather they meddled in important things?

[DaivdBehar]

Good point. Carry on, Supreme Court. Focus on standing, jurisdiction and procedure. Take longer vacations in Europe. Come to work at 10 AM, leave at 3 PM. You are doing too much. Take a nap.

[Syd Henderson]

Has the confidentiality problem in the last ever been resolved?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Not in the Walker case. My guess is that cert was denied because it wasn't a federal issue.

I wonder what would happen now, post-Dobbs, in a "pro-life" state, where the abortion had been performed in a state where it was legal. Would the forum state even entertain the claim? Would it consider abortion services to be illegal contracts where nobody involved has any claim to confidentiality?

[John F. Carr]

Fun new legal principles appear on the horizon. Redville says because there is no legitimate reason to perform an abortion all injury resulting from an abortion is compensable malpractice, even if abortion is not illegal where the abortion was performed. Blueton refuses to domesticate the judgment saying it violates public policy and awards sanctions against the plaintiff's lawyers for trying. The first is my prediction. The second is a bill in the Massachusetts legislature.

[Mr. Bumble]

What a quiet day at Reason.

[DaivdBehar]

See this on Ruan. Unanimous. Correct. Helpful. Rare.

https://reason.com/2022/07/15/doctors-say-federal-bureaucracy-is-keeping-them-from-adequately-treating-monkeypox/

[DaivdBehar]

Sorry. This is the link.

https://reason.com/2022/07/15/supreme-court-tells-cops-to-stop-playing-doctor/