More

Supreme Court Agenda: Strange Bedfellow, Riverbed Cases This Week (VIDEO)

Posted: 12/03/11 03:40 PM ET

The Supreme Court rounds out its December sitting this week with a couple of cases rife with ex-bedfellows, strange bedfellows and riverbeds.

Monday: Messerschmidt v. Millender

Shoot a sawed-off shotgun at your ex-girlfriend and you might just bring together some strange bedfellows to help you at the Supreme Court. When Shelly Kelly reported her ex-boyfriend's behavior to the Los Angeles Police Department, they obtained a warrant to search his place of residence for all firearms and proof of ownership or possession, as well as anything that showed his membership with the Crips gang. The SWAT team busted in and cleared the house, which was owned by the trigger-happy boyfriend's foster mother, Augusta Millender. They did not find the weapon Kelly had described, however. Instead, they came up with Millender's personal shotgun. Only later did the detective on the case find the suspect hiding under a motel room bed.

Millender alleged violations of her Fourth Amendment rights, claiming that the police had no probable cause to search for anything more than the ex-boyfriend's sawed-off shotgun. The Supreme Court on Monday will hear argument over whether the detective's error was serious enough to allow Millender, supported by the NRA and the ACLU, to pass through usual legal safeguards and sue the detective in his personal capacity.

Tuesday: Williams v. Illinois

For the fourth time in four terms, the Supreme Court will have it out over the limits of the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause. In 2009, the justices broke into an ideologically-scrambled 5-4 decision in which Justice Antonin Scalia led Justices Clarence Thomas, John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg to hold that lab reports entered into evidence must be accompanied by the lab tech who prepared it, no matter how reliable the report or understaffed the lab. Stevens and Souter have since retired, but when the Court revisited the issue in 2010 and again last term, both Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan followed in their predecessors' footsteps.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito, have perpetually dissented on this issue, and they will likely be hoping to peel off one vote to stop what they see as an unjustified exaltation of constitutional principle over criminal procedure practicality.

Wednesday: PPL Montana v. Montana

On Wednesday, the Court will explore the record of Lewis and Clark's expedition to determine who owns the riverbeds upon which three Montana dams rest. Awesome for constitutional history buffs -- and I'll try to make it awesome for everyone else in my after-argument recap.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
The Supreme Court rounds out its December sitting this week with a couple of cases rife with ex-bedfellows, strange bedfellows and riverbeds. Monday: Messerschmidt v. Millender Shoot a sawed-off...
The Supreme Court rounds out its December sitting this week with a couple of cases rife with ex-bedfellows, strange bedfellows and riverbeds. Monday: Messerschmidt v. Millender Shoot a sawed-off...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 130
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Santangelo
02:14 PM on 01/07/2012
Update....this just in..

Recently a tape was found of a recording from Justice Scalia's office. Read the transcribed version below:

Will there be anything else Mr. Scalia, asks the man.

Oh, yes. Could you make sure the brown shoes get shined, and drop off that grey suit to be dry cleaned. My briefs are on my desk so you can see how I am voting tomorrow, responded Scalia

Will you be needing anything else before I leave Mr.Scalia, a brandy? asked the man.

No that is all you can go, Goodnight Clarence.
06:19 PM on 12/05/2011
This is the first blog I have found that talks about the Supreme Court and it is refreshing to learn what they are doing.

That Detective had probably cause to search the house. They didn't find anything and nobody, and no property was hurt, there is no case for the mother to persue.

I believe that the riverbeds belong to the public. We are past the days when people can say this is my land because I claim it. If there is no real proof that it belonged to anyone then the riverbeds belong to the people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BurntOffering
Mrs. Jesus Christ
02:26 PM on 12/04/2011
I think its funny how People refuse to see or discuss the real 'Stange Bedfellows" aka Religion and Politics Run by a bunch of Republicans, corrupt judges and sons of guns who act like they "no not" what they have done in the name of the Lord or God We the People were taught to Trust. Presently before the Court is a discrimination case brought by a woman claiming she is Satan the daughter of God, Sister Spirit and espoused wife of Jesus Christ in the flesh of a Christian woman. Case # 11-5381 appears as closed, because No Attorney will represent this woman. I guess next she will have to ask for a Writ of Man Damn Us Relief and Prohibition regarding this Unconstitutional subject matter and Shame before GOD. Its a real simple case that contends since the men chose NO law respecting an establishment of religion, She ask for YES or Law respecting an establishment of Religion, such as our national motto, and the Oaths sworn on the Bible. I think its only fair since Females were not allowed to Vote, ever given a choice or decent respect of being asked their religion opinions. Besides that; I dont recall God giving ADAM (Any Darmn Arrogant Man) the Right to say No, God I wont obey or respect your laws?
photo
demisfine
Often correct, NEVER right.
10:18 AM on 12/04/2011
Activist "Justice" Roberts will be a pox on this nation for decades to come.
He is W's longest lasting proof of the reign of incompetence.
We must not forget that presidential elections have far reaching, long lasting effects.
photo
canoeboundaryh20
You paddle on your side, I'll paddle on mine.
10:17 AM on 12/04/2011
The Supremes can declare the shotgun a corporation.
The NRA goes wild.
08:22 AM on 12/04/2011
It figures. We have unknowns contributing tens of millions to make lying campaign ads for the uninformed or ignorant, thanks to the Supremes and they are worried about a lab tech coming to court for evidence he processed. After 2000 how much faith does an American really have in any decision this group makes? Until Scalara, Thomas, Alito and Roberts are gone, this Court should
be suspended from making any decisions on anything. What a farce.
09:45 AM on 12/04/2011
Wah. Wah Wah. Typical unAmerican crybaby complaint. "I didn't get my way."

The constitution oulines the 3 branches of government. The U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling. You do not have to like or agree with it, but, you should respect it because it is the law of the land.
We are a democracy, people need to learn to accept other's point of view. This will include politicians and laws all of us don't agree with.I accept Obama as my President. He won, fair and square.
08:10 AM on 12/04/2011
Let me suggest that the supreme court is the most powerful collective tribunal in the world..They are appointed for life.. Almost like the Mullah's that run IRAN..This group once it is shifted to the Communist/Socialist left, will forever change politics in america..The balance of power is beginning to shift and their judgements will overrule the constitution and shift the political landscape.. I Obama is re-elected Barney Frank could be your next supreme court justice..Or how about Van Jones..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard Davis 1
Liberal Democrat, atheist
08:48 AM on 12/04/2011
I agree that appointing Supreme Court justices for life seems silly and is currently counter-productive. Presidents try to nominate the youngest reliable justice that they can find so as to perpetuate their influence. It seems to me that 20 years would be enough, and is about what the founding fathers had in mind. They certainly didn't foresee justices serving for 40 years or more. There will be a big change, I think. The current court - the most "activist" in history, will become the most reversed in history in about 20 years.
demwolf
old enough to know better
10:51 AM on 12/04/2011
Van Jones would be better than Clarence Thomas
07:24 AM on 12/04/2011
They should be scraping the blunder of campaign reform.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:01 AM on 12/04/2011
After 30 years’ of deliberate miss management, buy Banks and Government’ the economy is on the verge of collapsing’.
2007 through 2011 the economy has been getting steadily worse.
The out look for 2012 and beyond should be ... obvious ... The Government is removing peoples rights’ and preparing to deploy the Military in our streets.
Trust me when I say ... things are going to get’, ... Worse’ ... consider this a “heads up”.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:13 AM on 12/04/2011
On the off-cahnce that one of our elected leaders were to go off his/her nut, the ENTIRE military complex, from JSOC on down would have to be on board with that. Sorry, I just don't think that would happen. More likely, the offending official(s) would be arrested.
Any soldier, sailor or airman has not only the right to question orders, but the RESPONSIBILTY to question orders that they feel may be illeagal. ( a direct consequence of the Nuremburg trials )
Our elected leaders may be screwed-up in the head, but our career military offcers are about the best in the world.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:19 AM on 12/04/2011
...I meant JCOS, not JSOC
04:16 AM on 12/04/2011
Expect the Court to find in favor of the cops or Big Money every time.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:00 AM on 12/04/2011
Simple- Give Millender back her shotgun.

Defendents have a right to face their accusers.

Lewis and Clark- frivolous Pffts

Simple,
09:51 AM on 12/04/2011
The question isn't whether or not this woman's gun should be returned...

"The Supreme Court on Monday will hear argument over whether the detective's error was serious enough to allow Millender, supported by the NRA and the ACLU, to pass through usual legal safeguards and sue the detective in his personal capacity."

The Court must decide if she can sue the detective personally for his mistake.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Republican = FAIL
10:25 AM on 12/04/2011
I think you missed the intent of that post.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TopBrain
Res ipsa loquitur
01:24 AM on 12/04/2011
The presence of the lab tech is a ridiculous issue for the SCOTUS. If opposing counsel disputes the tech report, he/she can always subpoena the tech to appear in court. This is an evidentiary dispute whereby the defense wants the prosecutor to do his/her job.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
bluntobject
Gandhi didn't like your attitude either!
01:23 AM on 12/04/2011
Will Clarence's charming and highly unethical wife be sitting in for him? She seems to do all the strategics on issues near and dear to Tea Bagging hearts, so she might as well sit in and rule on this stuff too. Clarence can go home and take a nap. Got to keep all these cases "going our way"!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Shuck
They are lying to you about who wrote Shakespeare.
01:09 AM on 12/04/2011
Smile! You're on Candid Camera.
photo
Larry Burstein
Proud to be an Oregonian
01:27 AM on 12/04/2011
Smile if you live in Canada!
photo
nazztea
Pending Approval
12:57 AM on 12/04/2011
FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution]
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

Except if you're walking around in New York City, driving your personnel vehicle, or taking public transportation.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
valkygrrl
Hail Eris
04:58 AM on 12/04/2011
Or walking on a sidewalk in Chicago.