Skip to main content

Finding Revisions to Supreme Court Opinions

By
Earlier this year, many were surprised to learn that Supreme Court opinions can be, and often are revised after the opinion’s initial release. The news articles regarding the practice were inspired by a  forthcoming article in the Harvard Law Review by Professor Richard J. Lazarus where the phenomenon, and its prevalence are examined.

The Supreme Court has noted that its opinions are not final until they are published in the official United States Reports (Morgan Stanley Capital Grp. v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 554 U.S. 527
(2008)). The time from when the bench opinion is issued to the actual publication of the print United States Reports volumes can extend over five years. After the bench opinion is released at the court upon announcement, a slip opinion is made available soon after. A couple of years later, the softcover preliminary prints of the United States Reports are published, with the notation that the opinions are still subject to revision.

According to Professor Lazarus, legal publishers like West and LexisNexis are given access to the changes to keep databases current, but it is difficult for the researcher to determine when any edits or changes were made. However, HeinOnline's Supreme Court Library maintains copies of not only the United States Reports, but also slip opinions and preliminary prints. To access the different versions of the same opinion, go to HeinOnline and select the Supreme Court Library. Next, click on the search tab and select “advanced search.” Then, enter the case name in the “case title” field (ex. Lawrence v. Texas) and search. The results will pull the three versions of the opinion so they may be compared side-by-side.

For a more passive approach, learn about changes to newer opinions by following @SCOTUS_servo, a Twitter account that alerts followers when the Court edits its decisions. The Twitter account crawls through electronic copies of decisions posted in the Supreme Court’s website. Whenever the program detects a change in a decision’s text, it alerts @SCOTUS_servo followers.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le...
1 comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lessons for Today from the Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda

By Anonymous
“Man’s inhumanity to man is not only perpetrated by the vitriolic actions of those who are bad. It is also perpetrated by the vitiating inaction of those who are good.” –Martin Luther King Jr.   Last week, I had the pleasure of attending  Professor Zachary D. Kaufman ’s presentation on  Lessons for Today from the Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda  hosted by the  Johannesburg Holocaust & Geno cide Ce ntre . Among the many takeaways highlighted by Professor Kaufman and drawn from  Lessons from Rwanda: Post-Genocide Law and Policy   were ten simple yet profound lessons:   Lesson #1: Hate speech is dangerous.   To illustrate the role that hate speech played in the Rwandan genocide, Professor Kaufman discussed multiple forms of  propaganda , such as Kangura, Radio Rwanda, and RTLM “hate radio.”   He concludes that we must have limits, including with respect to social media, and further asserts that social media must do a better jo...
Post a Comment
Read more