1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,320 JUDY WOODRUFF: The Supreme Court returned to the courtroom this morning to hear its first 2 00:00:04,320 --> 00:00:08,800 oral arguments of what looks to be an unusually consequential new term. 3 00:00:09,360 --> 00:00:10,480 John Yang has more. 4 00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:13,680 JOHN YANG: Judy, the Supreme Court term began 5 00:00:13,680 --> 00:00:17,200 this morning with familiar words from Chief Justice John Roberts. 6 00:00:17,200 --> 00:00:19,680 JOHN ROBERTS, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court: I have the honor to announce, 7 00:00:19,680 --> 00:00:24,080 on behalf of the court, that the October 2020 term of the Supreme 8 00:00:24,080 --> 00:00:29,080 Court of the United States is now closed. And the October 2021 term is now convened. 9 00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:35,320 JOHN YANG: But even though the justices, most of them, at least, were back in person, 10 00:00:35,360 --> 00:00:40,360 not much else seemed the same as when they were last in the courtroom in March 2020. 11 00:00:41,040 --> 00:00:46,040 And the cases set for argument this term could make it one of the most contentious in many years. 12 00:00:46,800 --> 00:00:49,440 Marcia Coyle, chief Washington correspondent for "The National 13 00:00:49,440 --> 00:00:54,160 Law Journal," was one of the two dozen of so reporters back in the courtroom this morning. 14 00:00:54,160 --> 00:00:56,000 And she is back in the she is back in the studio now. 15 00:00:56,000 --> 00:00:56,880 MARCIA COYLE, "The National Law Journal": John, yes. 16 00:00:56,880 --> 00:00:57,040 (CROSSTALK) 17 00:00:57,040 --> 00:00:59,266 JOHN YANG: Marcia, what was it like? What was it like this morning? 18 00:00:59,266 --> 00:01:02,640 MARCIA COYLE: Well, you know, John, it was normal and it was abnormal. 19 00:01:02,640 --> 00:01:06,000 It was normal in the fact that there are were justices actually 20 00:01:06,000 --> 00:01:10,480 on the bench and they were hearing oral arguments. But it was abnormal. 21 00:01:11,600 --> 00:01:16,600 First days at the Supreme Court, you usually have a court building that's full of tourists 22 00:01:17,440 --> 00:01:22,400 on the lower level, lines of people who are waiting to get seats in the courtroom, 23 00:01:22,400 --> 00:01:26,240 lines of lawyers in suits waiting to be sworn into the bar, 24 00:01:26,240 --> 00:01:31,240 and the whole floor seems to be humming with talk, but, today, silence, a few Supreme Court 25 00:01:33,200 --> 00:01:38,200 police officers, a few staff people going in and out of offices, everybody masked. 26 00:01:39,120 --> 00:01:42,560 You go into the courtroom, and you see the press, 27 00:01:43,280 --> 00:01:47,760 those of us who attended, we were in the public seats, not in the usual press section, 28 00:01:47,760 --> 00:01:51,520 but in public seats, so that we could be spread out. And we were masked. 29 00:01:51,520 --> 00:01:56,520 And, also, the lawyers who were going to argue, they were limited to having only one other 30 00:01:56,960 --> 00:02:01,960 lawyer with them -- before, you could have that table full of a team of lawyers -- also masked. 31 00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:08,160 In the guest section for the justices, there really was hardly anybody there, 32 00:02:08,160 --> 00:02:13,160 but Justice Kennedy, retired Justice Kennedy, showed up in mask. Justin Breyer's wife was there 33 00:02:14,720 --> 00:02:19,720 in a mask. And Justice Barrett's husband showed up masked, and they were appropriately distanced. 34 00:02:21,360 --> 00:02:26,080 So it was strange. And then, during the arguments, as you mentioned, 35 00:02:26,080 --> 00:02:31,080 they were all on the bench except for Justice Kavanaugh, who last week was positive for COVID 36 00:02:33,280 --> 00:02:38,280 and is staying out of the arguments this week. But he was participated remotely. So 37 00:02:38,400 --> 00:02:43,400 you had this disembodied voice echoing in the courtroom when he did ask questions. 38 00:02:44,720 --> 00:02:48,640 The only justice who wore a mask was Justice Sotomayor, 39 00:02:48,640 --> 00:02:53,040 and I think because of being extra cautious, and since she is a diabetic. 40 00:02:53,040 --> 00:02:56,960 So, it was strange, and then it wasn't strange. 41 00:02:56,960 --> 00:03:00,880 JOHN YANG: And it is a big term for this court. 42 00:03:00,880 --> 00:03:01,138 MARCIA COYLE: It is. 43 00:03:01,138 --> 00:03:03,840 JOHN YANG: I mean, there is hardly a hot-button issue 44 00:03:04,400 --> 00:03:09,400 that they are not considering this term, including the most divisive of all, abortion. 45 00:03:10,400 --> 00:03:11,520 MARCIA COYLE: That's right, John. 46 00:03:11,520 --> 00:03:16,520 And who knows. There may be two abortion cases getting to the court. At least, 47 00:03:17,040 --> 00:03:22,040 the -- there is still action in the lower courts on the Texas ban at six weeks of pregnancy. So, 48 00:03:24,480 --> 00:03:27,840 it is not only abortion. It's guns. They have taken up a case 49 00:03:27,840 --> 00:03:32,080 that could result in the expansion of gun rights under the Second Amendment. 50 00:03:32,080 --> 00:03:37,080 They have also taken two religion-related cases, one that deals with separation of 51 00:03:37,520 --> 00:03:42,520 church and state, one involving a death row inmate who wants to have his minister president 52 00:03:43,280 --> 00:03:48,280 in the death chamber, but praying and laying on hands. So, yes, you are absolutely right. 53 00:03:48,720 --> 00:03:53,720 And they could add to that easily. Pending is a big affirmative action case involving Harvard. 54 00:03:56,720 --> 00:04:01,720 The court continues to accept cases until about mid-January, and then, usually, they have about 55 00:04:03,520 --> 00:04:08,520 70 for arguments. And, right now, I think the number is about 39. So, this term could grow yet. 56 00:04:10,080 --> 00:04:15,080 JOHN YANG: And in this first week, on Wednesday, there is a case involving state secrets. 57 00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:16,160 (CROSSTALK) MARCIA COYLE: That's right, John. 58 00:04:16,160 --> 00:04:21,160 In fact, it is one of two state secrets cases, which is really unusual. The court hasn't looked 59 00:04:21,520 --> 00:04:26,520 at the state secrets doctrine for a long time. The first case that is on Wednesday 60 00:04:28,480 --> 00:04:33,360 involves somebody who is now at Guantanamo Bay, but he is trying to get evidence, 61 00:04:34,080 --> 00:04:39,080 what we call discovery of evidence from former federal contractors 62 00:04:39,760 --> 00:04:44,760 who were involved in his interrogation when he was at a CIA black site in Poland. 63 00:04:46,000 --> 00:04:50,000 This detainee was seriously interrogated. In fact, 64 00:04:50,000 --> 00:04:54,560 they say he was suffered brain damage and the loss of one eye. The government is saying, 65 00:04:54,560 --> 00:04:59,560 you can't have that evidence because it will expose national security to danger. 66 00:05:00,880 --> 00:05:02,640 The court has got to take a look at that. 67 00:05:02,640 --> 00:05:07,640 And there is another case that involves three Muslim men from California, I believe, 68 00:05:08,560 --> 00:05:13,560 who feel that they were -- that the FBI was surveilling them because of their religion. And, 69 00:05:15,680 --> 00:05:20,680 again, they want information and. The government has pleaded the state secrets doctrine. So, yes. 70 00:05:21,840 --> 00:05:26,840 And then there is also a very important death penalty -- the Boston Marathon bomber, his 71 00:05:27,280 --> 00:05:32,280 sentence was invalidated by a federal appellate court because of errors at trial. And the justices 72 00:05:34,160 --> 00:05:39,160 have agreed to look at those trial errors and see if the lower court was correct in what it did. 73 00:05:39,840 --> 00:05:42,080 So, yes, it is a huge term, huge. 74 00:05:42,080 --> 00:05:46,880 JOHN YANG: In recent weeks, we have had a number of justices give public remarks, 75 00:05:46,880 --> 00:05:51,840 all sort of defending the court against a lot of criticism from the public. 76 00:05:53,200 --> 00:05:54,320 What is going on here? 77 00:05:54,320 --> 00:05:58,880 MARCIA COYLE: John, I think it's a reaction to the court's more recent rulings 78 00:05:58,880 --> 00:06:03,880 on emergency applications that come to it. It is generally known as the court's shadow docket. 79 00:06:04,640 --> 00:06:09,600 And those rulings have come in very controversial areas, such as the Texas abortion ban, 80 00:06:10,320 --> 00:06:14,880 the Biden administration's effort to extend the ban on evictions, 81 00:06:14,880 --> 00:06:19,880 as well as the remain-in-Mexico immigration policy of the Trump administration. 82 00:06:21,120 --> 00:06:26,120 And so I think the justices -- some of the justices are voicing concerns about 83 00:06:26,240 --> 00:06:31,240 the court's -- the impact of this criticism of the court and maybe also have an eye on the fact that 84 00:06:31,760 --> 00:06:36,480 this is a very controversial term. The public is going to be watching. And so they're worried 85 00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:41,760 what the public is going to react to the decisions that may be coming forward. 86 00:06:41,760 --> 00:06:44,560 JOHN YANG: Marcia Coyle of "The National Law Journal," who will 87 00:06:44,560 --> 00:06:47,840 be helping us keep an eye on the term ahead, thank you very much. 88 00:06:47,840 --> 00:06:52,840 MARCIA COYLE: My pleasure, John.