Legal Commentary

Two of the three cases in which the Court granted certiorari this morning raise fascinating Federal Courts issues, and should make for interesting topics for next year's Fed Courts classes.

The first is the more famous case -- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, which raises a host of complicated questions about qualified immunity and Bivens.

The second is a case I've blogged about, but has  otherwise flown under the radar -- Haywood v. Drown, which raises the constitutionality of a provision of the New York corrections law that diverts all damages suits against corrections officers (including 1983 suits) to the New York Court of Claims, and replaces the officers as defendants with the State of New York. I wrote about the New York Court of Appeals' decision here, and why cert. should be granted here. [Update: As Jason Solomon rightly points out, my earlier coverage misreported the vote in the New York Court of Appeals. I noted that the decision was 6-1; it was actually 4-3.]

Combined with what's already on the docket for next Term, including Pearson v. Callahan (the Saucier v. Katz case), the 2008 Term is shaping up to be a very busy one for Fed Courts folks...