My children—both boys—were no doubt spared bruised lips and black eyes by the parental dictum that we do not resolve disputes with fisticuffs. Alas, that rule did not spare them the sting of playground injustices. So I, like many parents, would urge my boys to call their grievance to the attention of a teacher (or parent), promising that the grown-up would do his or her best to resolve the dispute by applying the rules fairly. Read more
Last week, popular fantasy sports sites DraftKings and FanDuel made headlines for some unsportsman-like conduct. The companies are facing scrutiny over alleged false advertising and what amounts to insider trading, unseemly business practices that could affect millions of users nationwide. These allegations led to a class action suit filed last week in federal court, in which a potentially nationwide group of fantasy sports fans seek to recover money they lost because of these unfair and unlawful practices.
A well-known marble statue outside the United States Supreme Court depicts lady justice. She wields a sword to signify her power, cradles scales to show her fairness, and wears a blindfold to demonstrate her impartiality. In the American justice system, she symbolizes not only the judges sitting on their high benches to pronounce the law, but also juries, sitting in their lower box to represent the community and decide the facts.
Inside the Supreme Court yesterday, the justices were called upon to decide the constitutionally required roles of juries and judges in the context of death sentencing in a case styled Hurst v. Florida.
This entry was originally published by OnLabor on Oct. 1, 2015 and is reposted here with the author’s permission.
In the run-up to the oral argument in Friedrichs we’ve paid a lot of attention to Justice Scalia’s concurrence in Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass’n. But, to date, we’ve largely ignored another Scalia opinion that deserves much more attention. That opinion is Justice Scalia’s dissent in Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois.