Source: https://www.wiggin.com/publications/supreme-court-update-orders-6/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 00:48:00+00:00

Document:
It's been ages since we last invaded your inboxes, but this time it's not because of a lack of activity at the Court. On the contrary, The Nine have handed down five new opinions since our last missive (on top of the four we previewed there), but we've been unable to tell you about them due to some mysterious network/server errors that are beyond our capacity to describe, except that they presumably were caused by Russian meddling. (If you receive any Updates from us in cryptic syntax describing rulings that upset the constitutional order, please forward them to Robert Mueller.) Our IT folks have finally resolved the problem, but meanwhile the entire February sitting has passed by and we've got a lot of catching up to do. Rather than inundate you with nine case summaries in one email, we'll give you the high-level overview here and roll out the more detailed summaries over the next few days, while we wait for the Court to return for its next sitting on March 19th.
Class v. United States (No. 16-424), holding that a criminal defendant does not waive his right to challenge the constitutionality of his statute of conviction when he enters into an unconditional guilty plea.
Merit Management Group LP v. FTI Consulting (No. 16-784), holding that a "safe harbor" provision of the Bankruptcy Code that prohibits a bankruptcy trustee from avoiding a fraudulent transfer in the form of a settlement payment made in connection with a securities contract is limited to the specific transfer the trustee seeks to avoid.
Texas v. New Mexico (No. 141, Orig.), holding that the United States should be permitted to intervene in a water dispute between parties to the Rio Grande Compact.
New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira (No. 17-340) asks whether a dispute over the applicability of Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, which exempts employment contracts of seamen, railroad workers, and other workers engaged in interstate commerce from the FAA's scope, is itself an arbitrability issue that must be resolved through arbitration and whether Section 1 applies to independent contractor agreements.
Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido (No. 17-587) asks whether the Age Discrimination in Employment Act's 20-employee minimum applies to political subdivisions of a state, or if instead all political subdivisions are subject to the ADEA, regardless of size.
The bigger news on the cert front, though, was the Court's denial of certiorari before judgment in Dep't of Homeland Security v. Regents of California (No. 17-1003). That means we won't be getting a DACA decision this term, though the Court's order did stipulate that "[i]t is assumed that the Court of Appeals will proceed expeditiously to decide this case." Interestingly, a different DACA petition has been pending before the Court for almost a year now. In Brewer v. Arizona Dream Act Coalition (No. 16-1180), a preemption case, Arizona's governor argues that DACA is not a valid "federal law" and therefore cannot preempt state law. The Court called for the views of the Solicitor General at the end of last term, but the SG waited until Valentine's Day to weigh in. In his brief, the SG urged the Court to hold the Arizona case pending a decision in Regents. Now that Regents has been sent back to the Ninth Circuit, it will be interesting to see how the Court handles Brewer decision, which has been distributed for next Friday's conference.
Alright. With that, you at least have a sense of what you've missed over the last two+ weeks. We'll be back with our first catch-up installment—summarizing the first three opinions of the February sitting—this afternoon.

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