An addendum

 SCOTUS also considered a case that resulted from its decision last term that essentially determined that much of present-day Oklahoma is part of the 1866 treaty boundary of the Five Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma. That decision, McGirt v Oklahoma, did not include any determination, beyond the parties present in that case, as to the effect of that ruling. Exactly how that decision might affect a host of prior cases, particularly involving jurisdiction of the state versus the tribes over native American persons living in those areas, has begun as a trickle but will, unless the Court acts to decide those issues, will flood the courts. In Bosse v. Oklahoma, a death row inmate convicted under state law for the murder of a mother and her two children, challenged the conviction. He argued that the state, having no jurisdiction over him since only federal authorities handle crimes on reservations, had no right to hold him under the prior conviction. The law for over a century has been that when a Native American commits a crime on reservation land, the authority to prosecute belongs to the federal government in federal district court, not to the state. The court placed Bosse's request for release on hold, and will likely hear full argument on the issues in this case next year. Only the three more liberal justices signed the order and they indicated that they would not have approved Oklahoma's request to stay the release order. Stay tuned for more of these types of cases and others on taxing authority, property taxes, and other issues where state and federal authority conflict. 

Look for a decision next week, or the next, on whether SCOTUS will take the Harvard admission discrimination case alleging that that school's admission policy discriminates against Asians. There is little doubt that it does, but the question is whether race-based discrimination in admissions remains a valid means of promoting past discrimination. Affirmative action has been under challenge for some time, and maybe the Court will toss AA in with abortion//reproductive rights precedent to overrule but not really (recall the Kavanaugh decision we discussed in the youth criminal sentencing case where his opinion was savaged by Sotomayor, and even by members on his side in the majority opinion for overruling the prior cases while denying that is what he was doing. Are we seeing a model for how Kavanaugh might author a Roe v Wade retreat? 

Stay tuned. 

I will comment on your comments later this week.

Kurt