Work on Campus for Hope set to continue; judge dismisses mandatory injunction against project. [KTNV]
Metro arrest 19 during Halloween sex offender compliance check. [8NewsNow]
Metro Air Unit showcases crime fighting capabilities at public event. [Fox5Vegas]
Is it illegal to pass a school bus in Nevada? [TNI]
Nevada ACLU sues over Trump admin’s new mandatory detention policy. [TNI; RJ]
Man who shot, killed Las Vegas dentist in 1980 gets life without parole. [RJ]
Attorney Sam Castor claims Las Vegas Water District stole evidence in suit over excessive use fees. [RJ]
The U.S. Supreme Court held oral argument on tariffs this morning. Thoughts? Also, here’s a piece by Erwin Chemerinsky on the tariffs case and whether amicus briefs matter. [SCOTUSblog]
I listened to part of the oral argument. I was stunned by how often the Solicitor General spoke over the Justices. I guess that’s because both he and they are so familiar with each other? I would be terrified to talk over a judge like that even at the RJC (although I’m sure it’s common at the lowest rung of law on Pecos).
I had to turn it off right after Gorsuch finished. He seemed incredulous. Of course, that doesn’t guarantee he won’t back Trump. Even if he does, there would need to be another conservative defector.
The SG always gets some more leeway, and in general the people who go up there a lot (e.g. Lisa Blatt) tend to try it more like a conversation where you can cut each other off. But it was interesting to me that Katyal, who has done dozens of arguments, still stopped talking the second a justice opened his or her mouth.
No, the SG is just as smug as some of the R justices, especially Alito. He was even more smarmy than usual, adding pounding on the bench to his usual repertoire today.
I’ll give them credit if their decision merits it.
Guest
Anonymous
November 5, 2025 10:42 am
Here are my general principles for amicus briefs:
1) You should have something unique to say. “We agree on the merits” is generally not a reason to file.
2) The brief’s argument should be tied to the particular amicus. Chamber of Commerce should argue about economic impact. A city should talk about the local effect. Doctors should talk about the science.
3) Generally factual is better than legal. If you can talk about the real-world impact on your amicus, that can provide the court with useful and persuasive information.
4) The more amici you represent, the worse the brief. This is probably more a SCOTUS issue than NVSC or 9th Circuit, but an amicus brief on behalf of “90 law professors” is going to say nothing interesting, but a brief by one person with a unique viewpoint can make a difference (e.g. the Supreme Court just asked for supplemental briefing on an issue raised by an amicus law professor).
5) Keep it short. Clerks/judges don’t want to read these, let them get what they need out of it quickly.
6) Chemerinsky touched on this but if your amicus is important and taking a surprising position, that can be worthwhile even if you don’t have a ton to say.
Guest
Anonymous
November 5, 2025 12:16 pm
Anybody else waiting for the “Ethics Round Table 2025” CLE zoom link to begin?
They are talking about flat fees in the “2025 Ethics Roundtable” CLE. Everything they are saying is intended to convince us that flat fees are a viable option, but for me, this is just affirming my choice to stop offering flat fees.
Mandami only won because that egotistical Curtis Sliwa refused to drop out. Cuomo head on would have won. They should show the movie “Warriors”. The thugs will take over the City. No where to run…..nowhere to hide…..Warriors……….
Assume Sliwa dropped out, and 100% of his votes went to Cuomo.
Mamdani still wins. Even with Staten Island voting for a sort-of Democract with a Trump endorsement, Mamdani wins. That’s kind of what happens when you pull over 50%.
If he dropped out and stumped for Cuomo it would have made a difference. It was a three way race. Sliwa was the spoiler. Mandami was supposed to walk away with it–he squeaked by. Not good for NY.
Businesses will flee. You can’t offer free everything like childcare and bus rides. The police will stand down and let the thugs take over.
So you think there were voters out there that voted for Mamdani, but would have voted for Cuomo if Sliwa told them to? Even though they could, you know, just vote for Cuomo? Or Sliwa? That’s just straight up coo-coo-puffs, man.
Cuomo was a flawed candidate- he lost before in the primary. But if you had Sliwa’s percentage and Adams they are neck and neck. Three parties on the ballot is one too many. Mandami’s winning was a fluke. New Yorkers will get tired of him quickly.
NYC voters deserve their fate. Free everything, but no way to pay for it. Gigantic city debt, economic activity will go elsewhere. No developer will build new housing.
Stand by my comment. Some trading is already done outside of the city. The port may stay, but it’s not so difficult to direct ships to other east coast ports. Universal childcare is estimated to add 6 Billion, only one of the freebies promised. NYC already has large debt, and unfunded retirement commitments. With rent freezes, there is no money in developing/building new housing.
Universal childcare increases cost, but also stimulates the economy by creating jobs AND allowing young parents to be more productive. I’m curious to hear your opinions of handouts given by republican leaders to the wealthy (and Argentina).
Mandami is already backpedaling on his campaign promises. The City can’t afford its existing programs. They once came close to going bankrupt in 1975. It will happen again but this time they will wipeout the City pensions. It is so bad they can’t hire any police. This will only get worse because there is no way he will back the blue.
Ok. so you wont acknowledge that there are positive societal and economic impacts to universal childcare. I don’t particularly care about NYC nor Mamdani. Seems like you’re really upset that he might not follow through on all of his campaign promises. Speaking of which, glad the Ukraine/USSR war ended back in January.
Well, if you earn $500,000 it is reported that the combined federal, state, and NYC taxes is an effective rate of 45%.
Couple that with the very high cost of living in NYC. So IF additional jobs are created, they will be lower income people living outside of the city. IF, additional jobs are created since someone is already doing that work.
Importantly, because universal child care is government, they will obtain the same wages and benefits as other city workers.
Sorry, Mandami plans are not all milk and honey. There is no such thing as “free”.
Every problem 9:42 identified above can be solved with an influx of money. New York City residents, particularly its wealthy residents, have plenty of that. Considering that Mamdami just won the young male vote by a 40 percent margin over Cuomo despite a maximum effort from a group of bipartisan megadonors to stop him, if the money currently doesn’t exist to finance the campaign promises he made, he has a pretty clear mandate to go out and take it from some of the same people who spent millions trying to defeat him.
Guest
Anonymous
November 5, 2025 3:28 pm
RJ Judging the Judges coming out in two weeks. Peterson, look out.
Peterson will be just fine. I look forward to Judge Israel repeating his line to the RJ that his rating is low because he holds attorneys accountable. Gold, Jerry! Gold!
Peterson is absolutely awful to appear in front of. Was just in there Monday. She was so wound up and upset 20 minutes into her calendar that she had to take a break. But not before she berated the CO for doing his job keeping the courtroom safe.
My favorite Israel story was the time he ran quickly through NRCP 16 Scheduling Conferences. He had a substitute court clerk who did not know how to handle him. After he gave everyone his spiel about scheduling settlement conferences and how his court clerk would get a scheduling order out to them did his court clerk to finally get the nerve to speak up and tell him that these were actually calendar calls. Gold, Jerry! Gold!
Not sure what all this talk about Peterson is about. I tried a case before her a few years ago and found her to be prepared, engaged, and generally attempted to be fair to both sides. Has she gone all Kishner in the last few years or something?
I listened to part of the oral argument. I was stunned by how often the Solicitor General spoke over the Justices. I guess that’s because both he and they are so familiar with each other? I would be terrified to talk over a judge like that even at the RJC (although I’m sure it’s common at the lowest rung of law on Pecos).
I had to turn it off right after Gorsuch finished. He seemed incredulous. Of course, that doesn’t guarantee he won’t back Trump. Even if he does, there would need to be another conservative defector.
More likely it’s because S.G. Sauer isn’t a very good advocate.
The SG always gets some more leeway, and in general the people who go up there a lot (e.g. Lisa Blatt) tend to try it more like a conversation where you can cut each other off. But it was interesting to me that Katyal, who has done dozens of arguments, still stopped talking the second a justice opened his or her mouth.
No, the SG is just as smug as some of the R justices, especially Alito. He was even more smarmy than usual, adding pounding on the bench to his usual repertoire today.
If you are going criticize the “R Justices” then give credit to Gorsuch and Coney Barrett who dissembled Sauer’s arguments.
I’ll give them credit if their decision merits it.
Here are my general principles for amicus briefs:
1) You should have something unique to say. “We agree on the merits” is generally not a reason to file.
2) The brief’s argument should be tied to the particular amicus. Chamber of Commerce should argue about economic impact. A city should talk about the local effect. Doctors should talk about the science.
3) Generally factual is better than legal. If you can talk about the real-world impact on your amicus, that can provide the court with useful and persuasive information.
4) The more amici you represent, the worse the brief. This is probably more a SCOTUS issue than NVSC or 9th Circuit, but an amicus brief on behalf of “90 law professors” is going to say nothing interesting, but a brief by one person with a unique viewpoint can make a difference (e.g. the Supreme Court just asked for supplemental briefing on an issue raised by an amicus law professor).
5) Keep it short. Clerks/judges don’t want to read these, let them get what they need out of it quickly.
6) Chemerinsky touched on this but if your amicus is important and taking a surprising position, that can be worthwhile even if you don’t have a ton to say.
Anybody else waiting for the “Ethics Round Table 2025” CLE zoom link to begin?
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/henderson-councilwoman-indicted-ordered-to-have-no-contact-with-another-councilwoman-3533348/
They are talking about flat fees in the “2025 Ethics Roundtable” CLE. Everything they are saying is intended to convince us that flat fees are a viable option, but for me, this is just affirming my choice to stop offering flat fees.
Just like the fisherman intends to convince the trout that that fly is a viable option.
Zohran 4 President 2028
rabble rousing
Mandami only won because that egotistical Curtis Sliwa refused to drop out. Cuomo head on would have won. They should show the movie “Warriors”. The thugs will take over the City. No where to run…..nowhere to hide…..Warriors……….
Assume Sliwa dropped out, and 100% of his votes went to Cuomo.
Mamdani still wins. Even with Staten Island voting for a sort-of Democract with a Trump endorsement, Mamdani wins. That’s kind of what happens when you pull over 50%.
Mandami won 50.4 percent of the votes cast in the election. How would Silwa dropping out have helped, exactly?
If he dropped out and stumped for Cuomo it would have made a difference. It was a three way race. Sliwa was the spoiler. Mandami was supposed to walk away with it–he squeaked by. Not good for NY.
Businesses will flee. You can’t offer free everything like childcare and bus rides. The police will stand down and let the thugs take over.
So you think there were voters out there that voted for Mamdani, but would have voted for Cuomo if Sliwa told them to? Even though they could, you know, just vote for Cuomo? Or Sliwa? That’s just straight up coo-coo-puffs, man.
He won by 9 points, against the state’s former governor. I don’t think he was polling above 50% in any of the pre-election polls.
Cuomo was a flawed candidate- he lost before in the primary. But if you had Sliwa’s percentage and Adams they are neck and neck. Three parties on the ballot is one too many. Mandami’s winning was a fluke. New Yorkers will get tired of him quickly.
NYC voters deserve their fate. Free everything, but no way to pay for it. Gigantic city debt, economic activity will go elsewhere. No developer will build new housing.
Yeah, pretty clearly you don’t have the slightest concept of the size of NYC’s economic engine. Wall Street, banks, the Port aren’t going anywhere.
Stand by my comment. Some trading is already done outside of the city. The port may stay, but it’s not so difficult to direct ships to other east coast ports. Universal childcare is estimated to add 6 Billion, only one of the freebies promised. NYC already has large debt, and unfunded retirement commitments. With rent freezes, there is no money in developing/building new housing.
Universal childcare increases cost, but also stimulates the economy by creating jobs AND allowing young parents to be more productive. I’m curious to hear your opinions of handouts given by republican leaders to the wealthy (and Argentina).
Mandami is already backpedaling on his campaign promises. The City can’t afford its existing programs. They once came close to going bankrupt in 1975. It will happen again but this time they will wipeout the City pensions. It is so bad they can’t hire any police. This will only get worse because there is no way he will back the blue.
Ok. so you wont acknowledge that there are positive societal and economic impacts to universal childcare. I don’t particularly care about NYC nor Mamdani. Seems like you’re really upset that he might not follow through on all of his campaign promises. Speaking of which, glad the Ukraine/USSR war ended back in January.
Well, if you earn $500,000 it is reported that the combined federal, state, and NYC taxes is an effective rate of 45%.
Couple that with the very high cost of living in NYC. So IF additional jobs are created, they will be lower income people living outside of the city. IF, additional jobs are created since someone is already doing that work.
Importantly, because universal child care is government, they will obtain the same wages and benefits as other city workers.
Sorry, Mandami plans are not all milk and honey. There is no such thing as “free”.
Every problem 9:42 identified above can be solved with an influx of money. New York City residents, particularly its wealthy residents, have plenty of that. Considering that Mamdami just won the young male vote by a 40 percent margin over Cuomo despite a maximum effort from a group of bipartisan megadonors to stop him, if the money currently doesn’t exist to finance the campaign promises he made, he has a pretty clear mandate to go out and take it from some of the same people who spent millions trying to defeat him.
RJ Judging the Judges coming out in two weeks. Peterson, look out.
Peterson will be just fine. I look forward to Judge Israel repeating his line to the RJ that his rating is low because he holds attorneys accountable. Gold, Jerry! Gold!
I would say that he needs to retire but he retired years ago. He just refuses to stop cashing the checks.
Peterson is absolutely awful to appear in front of. Was just in there Monday. She was so wound up and upset 20 minutes into her calendar that she had to take a break. But not before she berated the CO for doing his job keeping the courtroom safe.
Berated the CO?? That’s awful. Just awful.
I’ve got three cases with him and haven’t seen his face in over a year. I don’t feel very accountable.
My favorite Israel story was the time he ran quickly through NRCP 16 Scheduling Conferences. He had a substitute court clerk who did not know how to handle him. After he gave everyone his spiel about scheduling settlement conferences and how his court clerk would get a scheduling order out to them did his court clerk to finally get the nerve to speak up and tell him that these were actually calendar calls. Gold, Jerry! Gold!
Not sure what all this talk about Peterson is about. I tried a case before her a few years ago and found her to be prepared, engaged, and generally attempted to be fair to both sides. Has she gone all Kishner in the last few years or something?
She’s nice socially but mean on the bench. Reminiscent of Judge John Mendoza.
I was the DA. Judge Mendoza told defense counsel, “Would you get your secretary out of the courtroom?” He was referring to me.