Petitions of the week – SCOTUSblog
Posted Fri, October 11th, 2019 9:09 am by Andrew Hamm
This week we spotlight petitions pending earlier than the Supreme Courtroom that deal with, amongst different issues, whether or not district courts have inherent authority to launch grand jury supplies in extraordinary circumstances, as within the case of a researcher investigating the 1956 Galíndez affair, and whether or not Congress supposed a statute giving a competitive-bidding choice to suppliers owned and managed by veterans to trump the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act, which directs the federal government to accumulate sure items and providers from nonprofit entities that make use of blind and severely disabled people.
The petitions of the week are beneath the leap:
McKeever v. Barr19-307Subject: Whether or not district courts have inherent authority to launch grand jury supplies in extraordinary circumstances, similar to when the case is traditionally important and the general public curiosity strongly favors disclosure.
Ekhlassi v. Nationwide Lloyds Insurance coverage Firm19-312Subject: Whether or not the availability beneath Part 4072 of the Nationwide Flood Insurance coverage Act of 1968 of “unique” federal jurisdiction applies to fits towards non-public insurers.
Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind v. PDS Consultants Inc.19-329Points: (1) Whether or not the Tucker Act’s grant of bid-protest jurisdiction to the Courtroom of Federal Claims extends to fits that problem the lawfulness of a federal company’s acquisition insurance policies and practices, and their underlying statutory basis, outdoors the context of a selected solicitation concerning, or the award of, a authorities contract; and (2) whether or not Congress supposed 38 U.S.C. § 8127(d)’s competitive-bidding choice for suppliers owned and managed by veterans to trump the obligatory necessities of the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act, which directs the federal authorities to accumulate sure items and providers completely from nonprofit entities that make use of blind and severely disabled people, that dictate that businesses should purchase items and providers within the first occasion utilizing the AbilityOne Procurement Record.
Sequoia Capital Operations, LLC v. Gingras19-331Subject: Whether or not, when an arbitration settlement comprises a separate “delegation provision” that reserves for an arbitrator the authority to resolve any disputes regarding arbitrability, Part 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act requires a courtroom to resolve any problem to that provision’s validity earlier than the courtroom might proceed to handle whether or not the events’ underlying dispute is arbitrable.
Regents of the College of Minnesota v. LSI Company19-337Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this weblog in numerous capacities, is among the many counsel to the petitioner on this case. This itemizing happens with out regard to the probability that certiorari can be granted.Subject: Whether or not the inter partes assessment proceedings introduced by non-public respondents towards the College of Minnesota on this case are barred by sovereign immunity.
Posted in McKeever v. Barr, Ekhlassi v. Nationwide Lloyds Insurance coverage Firm, Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind v. PDS Consultants Inc., Sequoia Capital Operations, LLC v. Gingras, Regents of the College of Minnesota v. LSI Company, Circumstances within the Pipeline
Petitions of the week,
SCOTUSblog (Oct. 11, 2019, 9:09 AM),