Circuit Split Alerter

What source of law governs the first prong of the Berkovitz/Gaubert discretionary-function inquiry under the FSIA—U.S. domestic law or the foreign sovereign’s own law/international law?

What showing is required under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d) to collaterally attack an illegal-re-entry indictment when the underlying expedited-removal order relied on a conviction later determined not to be an aggravated felony—specifically, who bears the burden of proving an intelligent waiver of judicial review and whether the later change in law, by itself, satisfies § 1326(d)(2) & (3).

Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars district-court jurisdiction over collateral (generally applicable) challenges to USCIS policies governing discretionary adjustment-of-status decisions under 8 U.S.C. § 1255.

Whether state statutes that ban private entities from contracting with the federal government to provide civil immigration-detention services violate the Supremacy Clause by infringing intergovernmental immunity (and/or are pre-empted by federal immigration statutes).

Whether the federal kidnapping statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1), requires that a victim be held for a period appreciably longer than the time necessary to commit an accompanying offense (the 'incidental-kidnapping' or Berry test).

Whether state (or territorial) antitrust and fair-competition laws are categorically pre-empted by the federal "business of baseball" exemption under the Supremacy Clause, or whether such state claims may proceed absent an independent Commerce Clause barrier.

Whether 21 U.S.C. § 959 applies extraterritorially to the offense of possession with intent to distribute narcotics.

Whether a prisoner who has NOT been convicted of a sex offense nonetheless possesses a liberty interest (protected by the Fourteenth Amendment) in avoiding mandatory participation in a sex-offender treatment program when completion of the program is imposed as a condition of parole under a discretionary parole regime.

What standard of appellate review applies when a defendant fails to object to a district court’s omission of the § 851(b) colloquy—plain-error or harmless-error review?

Whether an error must implicate a constitutional right to be deemed a 'structural error' that automatically requires reversal, and, by extension, whether a Rule 23(b) violation (proceeding with eleven jurors without consent) can ever be structural.

Proper post-Morgan v. Sundance standard for finding waiver of a contractual right to arbitrate under the Federal Arbitration Act.

Whether a federal habeas court has discretion to reject a State’s deliberate waiver of the procedural-default bar after Wood v. Milyard.

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) may constitutionally bar habitual marijuana users from possessing firearms after N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen.

Whether a Social Security claimant is entitled to a new hearing before a different, properly-appointed ALJ when the original, improperly-appointed ALJ’s decision was vacated on the merits but the same ALJ (now constitutionally appointed) presides on remand.

Whether Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court’s claim-specific personal-jurisdiction requirement applies to Fair Labor Standards Act collective actions filed in federal court.