Various companies, including Nike Inc., Campbell Soup Co. and American Apparel, filed briefs backing Jack Daniel’s, saying the appeals court’s interpretation of the law threatened trademark protections that shield the value of iconic brands.
Read more at NBC News
The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a claim against Twitter under an anti-terrorism law for platforming ISIS propaganda. More broadly, in a similar appeal against Google, the court passed on deciding the scope of legal protections for internet companies in a case that had huge implications for how the internet functions. The issue was whether Section 230 protects internet platforms from lawsuits stemming from their algorithms.
Read more at MSNBC
One police officer opens a car door, and another looks inside. Did they search without a warrant?
In Jackson v. Ohio, Jackson asks the justices to grant review and reverse the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision. Until the state supreme court’s decision, Jackson contends, “no American court had ever held that the police can shield their searches from constitutional scrutiny by dividing their work between two officers.”
Read more at ScotusBlog
Without context, the issue in Reed might look small. Reed, however, is more than a case about when the statute of limitations period for a DNA-access claim begins. In fact, it operates on three distinct planes of legal discourse.
Read more at Slate
The justices are due to rule by the end of June whether Alphabet Inc's YouTube can be sued over its video recommendations to users. That case tests whether a U.S. law that protects technology platforms from legal responsibility for content posted online by their users also applies when companies use algorithms to target users with recommendations.
Read more at Reuters.com
Results suggest the justices are on reasonable grounds to hesitate. Contentious exchanges are those the media will cover. If the media are able to present such stories with the Zoom-like camera angle, the results for the court could be devastating.
Read more at The Wall Street Journal
Supreme Court asks Congress for more security money due to threats
With a new annual budget request posted Thursday, the Supreme Court told Congress that it needs nearly $6 million in new security funding to expand the protection justices receive following threats to the court last summer.
Read more at CNN
Why Ketanji Brown Jackson Split With the Court’s Liberals in a 5–4 Decision
Jackson was the only justice to join a key section of Gorsuch’s opinion endorsing special solicitude for federal defendants’ due process rights. It points toward a skepticism of government power that should cheer civil libertarians across the political spectrum.
Read more at Slate.com
Supreme Court Tackles Fraud Among Business Partners, Not Spouses
In upholding the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit opinion, the high court said that liability can be held against a partner of a wrongdoer. The justices said they wanted to clear up lower court “confusion” on the meaning of the bankruptcy code’s exception to discharging debts obtained by actual fraud.
Read more at Bloomberg Law
U.S. Supreme Court snubs Wikipedia bid to challenge NSA surveillance
Turning away the Wikimedia Foundation's appeal, the justices left in place a lower court's dismissal of the lawsuit based on the government's assertion of what is called the state secrets privilege, a legal doctrine that can shut down litigation if disclosure of certain information would damage U.S. national security.
Read more at Reuters
