Weekly News Update

weekly-news

*The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Apple Inc’s challenge to an appellate court decision that it conspired with five publishers to increase e-book prices, meaning Apple will have to pay $450 million as part of a settlement. [Reuters]

*It’s become a daily ritual in the White House press briefing room. Reporters inquire about Supreme Court nominee rumors, then press secretary Josh Earnest winks them away with an in-on-the-joke smirk. In a briefing last week, one reporter tried three lures to fish a name out of Earnest. [KWQC News]

*A NY judge has dismissed a petition that claimed Ted Cruz was not eligible to run for President because he is not a “natural born citizen.” Judge David A. Weinstein’s ruling was procedural, stating that the petitioners failed to submit timely objections, which stripped the court of jurisdiction over the petition. [CNN]

*To shed light on what many perceive as a lack of transparency at the U.S. Supreme Court, Bloomberg BNA’s Kimberly Robinson and Fix the Court’s Gabe Roth took to the streets — First Street and East Capitol Street, to be exact — to see what it takes for the public to view an oral argument at the high court. [Bloomberg]

*Nearly a decade has passed since an aspiring young lawyer in California graduated in the top tier of her class, passed the state bar exam and set out to use the law degree she had spent about $150,000 to acquire. But on Monday, in a San Diego courtroom, Anna Alaburda will tell a story that has become all too familiar among law students in the United States: Since graduating from the Thomas Jefferson School of Law in 2008, she has yet to find a full-time salaried job as a lawyer. [NY Times]

*The U.S. Department of Justice has appealed an order by a court in New York that turned down its request that Apple should be compelled to extract data from the iPhone 5s of an alleged drug dealer. [ComputerWorld]

*The NYPD’s program to spy on Muslims was the topic of heated debate Tuesday before a panel of appellate judges who must decide if any details about the department’s practices must be disclosed under the state’s Freedom of Information Law. [NY Daily News]