This week is expected to be one of the more consequential ones at the Supreme Court in recent years. The justices have yet to rule on 11 cases from the 2012-13 term, including the four most closely watched: two on same-sex marriage and one each on affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act. The court will issue rulings sometime after 10 a.m. Eastern on Monday, including potentially on one or more of those major cases.
We realize that people will be eager to know what a ruling means as soon as it comes out (and you can read the decision yourself when it is posted on the court’s Web site). But we also want to point out that the immediate descriptions of any ruling may not be very meaningful.
For one thing, a ruling could be complicated, as were last year’s health care ruling and the 2000 Bush v. Gore decision, and not amenable to instant summarizing. The court could even announce one portion of a decision â€" especially on same-sex marriage, given the two different cases â€" before it releses another portion.
Dozens of Times journalists, in Washington, New York and around the country, are covering the major rulings and the reactions to them by the public and those directly affected. At the center of the coverage is Adam Liptak, the Supreme Court reporter for The Times (and a lawyer), who will be in court to hear the ruling. He offered an overview of this week, and what it will say about the justices’ vision of equality, in Sunday’s New York Times.
The moment that we feel comfortable with a ruling’s basic meaning, which could be almost immediately, we plan to explain the decision. But we promise not to bombard you with guesswork or unintelligible legal technicalities. The Times will also run blog posts from the legal experts at SCOTUSblog on our own site, as well as ask other outside expert! s to help readers understand the decision. Once the initial meaning of the ruling seems clear, Times reporters and editors will be analyzing it in real time, on our live blog dedicated to the ruling and on stories appearing across our digital platforms. We will also post updates to Twitter on @thecaucus and @nytimes, and post selected reactions from readers.
We expect to have Mr. Liptak’s initial story about any ruling by late morning or shortly after noon, not long after the court’s session has ended. Whatever happens Monday, we expect the court to issue more rulings later this week, on days yet to be announced.
- For background on same-sex marriage, we recommend: Mr. Liptak’s article on the history of gay clerks at the Supreme Court; on the legal strategy, with roots in San Francisco, that helped push the cases to the court so quickly; on the shadow of Roe v. Wade; and on the two days of oral arguments earlier this year. We also recommend Ashley Parker’s article on younger opponents of same-sex marriage; Sheryl Gay Stolberg’s article on Ken Mehlman, a former Bush adviser turned advocate for same-sex marriage; Michael D. Shear’s article on the decisions that may await President Obama; and a recent New York Times/CBS poll, as described by Ms. Stolberg and Dalia Sussman,
- On affirmative action: an article by Nelson D. Schwartz and Michael Cooper about affirmative action in Texas; Richard Perez-Pena’s article about obstacles on class-based affirmative action; Mr. Liptak’s article about the plaintiff and the University of Texas, as well as his article about oral arguments; and my article about the role tht fairness and diversity played at oral arguments.
- On the Voting Rights Act: Mr. Liptak’s article from Shelby County, Ala., the plaintiff in the case, as well as his article about the oral arguments; Campbell Robertson’s article, in Monday’s Times, about the act; Nate Silver’s blog post about the use of statistics during oral arguments; and a graphical overview of the act.
Thanks for being with us.