Supreme Court

Loyola Law School Professors Comment on Supreme Court Term

Loyola Law School professors are to comment issues before the U.S. Supreme Court's October 2017 Term.

Loyola Law School, Los Angeles professors are available for commentary on a range of issues before the U.S. Supreme Court in its October 2017 Term, including:


Abbott v. Perez redistricting case

  • Associate Dean Justin Levitt, who runs the helpful guide All About Redistricting, writes: "In many ways, this case is about Texas’s redistricting plan from 2011, and it’s remarkable that it’s still being contested today, and likely won’t be resolved until the 2020 elections (if then). Though the case ostensibly turns on the details of particular districts entwined in an exceedingly complicated procedural fight, it’s really about a state’s ability to escape liability for intentional discrimination by slightly changing the rules once it gets caught. And the outcome of this case potentially sets the stage for putting Texas back under federal supervision for voting claims, even after the Supreme Court struck the heart of the Voting Rights Act in 2013." 
    Levitt notes that he worked on parts of the case while serving as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Pereira v. Sessions and Trump v. Hawaii immigration cases

  • Professor Kathleen Kim, faculty advisor to the Loyola Immigrant Justice Clinic and noted immigration law scholar, is available for commentary.


DACA order

  • Loyola Immigrant Justice Clinic Co-Directors Marissa Montes and Emily Robinson are available for commentary on U.S. Supreme Court’s order today declining to hear an appeal to a federal judge’s injunction of President Trump’s move to rescind DACA.

Janus v. American Federation

  • Professor Aaron Caplan, a constitutional law scholar who specializes in First Amendment issues, has tracked the case on public-sector employee unions.
  • Professor Jessica Levinson, an expert who closely follows the intersection of politics and law, recently published the op-ed, “Supreme Court Decision on Janus v. AFSCME Likely to Permanently Weaken Public Unions.” In it, she writes: “The case presents not only an important legal question regarding the contours of the First Amendment, but also a significant political and policy question regarding the power of public unions in America.”

United States v. Microsoft

  • Professor Stan Goldman, a Fourth Amendment expert, is available for commentary. Goldman teaches Criminal Procedure, Evidence and related courses.

Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky

  • Professor Justin Levitt, a former Justice Department official overseeing voting rights, is available for commentary.
  • Professor Jessica Levinson, a campaign-finance expert who serves as president of the Los Angeles Ethics Commission, is available for commentary.