Source: http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Live_blog_of_opinions__April_18_2017
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 00:12:49+00:00

Document:
Good morning, everyone! Welcome to our live blog.
I am down at the court waiting for possible opinions at 10 am.
We could get a pretty wide range of opinions today. There is still one opinion left from October: Manrique v. United States. Justice Thomas is the only justice who does not yet have an opinion from October, so he is likely the author of that decision, whenever it comes.
There are three decisions left from November: Venezuela v. Helmerich & Payne International; Bank of America v. Miami; and Sessions v. Morales-Santana. Justices Ginsburg and Breyer do not yet have any November decisions, so presumably they each have at least one of theirs; the third one could be just about anyone's.
And from December we have Jennings v. Rodriguez and McCrory v. Harris; Roberts, Alito, and Kagan have not yet written for December. Thanks to the blog's Andrew Hamm for putting these together.
Is it reasonable to think Packingham V North Carolina could be one?
Since the Chief wrote two opinions for January, do you think it's likely that Kagan & Alito are writing for December?
Anyone noteworthy there yesterday for Justice Gorsuch's first day on the bench? His family? Retired justices? Etc?
If a case comes from a circuit in which a new justice sat doe s he or she recuse even if he or she was not on the panel which decided the case?
How likely is a 4-4 summary affirmance in the City of Miami cases? Unless the Court comes to some compromise position (which Gorsuch's confirmation may motivate on the liberals' side), it is hard to count to five for a reversal.
Last time one reader asked about the quickest turnaround to hearing a case in recent memory. Here’s what I found going back to Stevens.
I didn't see Louise Gorsuch yesterday, but didn't look that closely at the other side of the courtroom.
going in to wait for opinions.
Any chance that Gorsuch will write an opinion this term?
To put it another way, the award is limited to the fees that the party would not have incurred but for the bad faith.
The district court has broad discretion to calculate fee awards under that standard.
But here, the court granted legal fees beyond those resulting from the litigation misconduct, so this award cannot stand.
Amy is going for the next one. Probably not more than one more, because there is only one box.
Second and final opinion. Coventry Health Care v Nevils. 8-0, by Ginsburg, concurrence by Thomas.
The Federal Employees Health Benefits Act's express preemption provision overrides state law barring subrogation and reimbursement.
The regime Congress enacted is compatible with the Supremacy Clause.
Barely 11 pages. Thomas has a one-paragraph concurrence.
That is all the opinions for today.
Do we know how Gorsuch has staffed his chambers with clerks? Did he bring some in with him, or is he relying on a pool?
And that is all she wrote. We are still waiting on Manrique and the November cases. Maybe we will get one of them tomorrow? We will be back here again at 9:45; hope to see you then!

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.