SCOTUS: 11 New Relists for November Conference; Goldman Sachs Cert Granted

• The Supreme Court has added 11 new cases to its relist docket for the upcoming November conference, a notable increase from the previous week.
• The Court granted certiorari in *Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Brown*, agreeing to hear arguments on when bankruptcy courts can refuse to enforce arbitration agreements.
• Among the new relists, *Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services* is considered highly consequential, involving a challenge to a Trump-era immigration proclamation.
• The federal government is advocating for review in three of the new relisted cases, including the *Mullin* case.
• The Court denied without comment the petition in *Clemente Properties, Inc. v. Pierluisi-Urrutia*, which raised questions about intangible property takings and sovereign immunity.

Lawyers should closely monitor these relisted cases, particularly Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center and Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Brown, as they signal potential upcoming Supreme Court decisions that could establish new precedents in immigration law, bankruptcy, and arbitration enforcement, directly impacting client advice and litigation strategies.

The Supreme Court's upcoming November conference is set to consider a substantial increase in cert petitions, with a notable surge of 11 new relists. This marks a significant jump from the previous week's four, indicating a potentially busy period for the justices as they determine which cases will join their merits docket. The practice of relisting a petition often signals that the Court is giving a case closer consideration, potentially leading to a grant of certiorari.

Among the cases recently addressed, the high court granted certiorari in *Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Brown*, a case that had been relisted three times. This decision means the Court will now examine when bankruptcy courts possess the authority to decline the enforcement of arbitration agreements, particularly in disputes involving alleged breaches of the automatic stay. This development is crucial for understanding the interplay between bankruptcy proceedings and contractual arbitration clauses.

Conversely, another previously relisted petition, *Clemente Properties, Inc. v. Pierluisi-Urrutia*, was denied without comment after appearing on the relist docket twice. This case involved a petition from the family of baseball legend Roberto Clemente, challenging Puerto Rico's use of his image and raising complex questions concerning the taking of intangible property and the scope of Puerto Rico's sovereign immunity.

Of the new additions to the relist docket, *Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services* stands out as potentially the most impactful. This case involves a challenge to Proclamation 10888, an executive order issued by then-President Donald Trump on his first day in office. The proclamation aimed to suspend the entry of non-citizens described as being "engaged in the invasion across the southern border" and imposed restrictions on those who violated the suspension.

The federal government is actively seeking review in this matter, appealing a decision from the D.C. Circuit. The government's involvement highlights the significant policy implications of the case, which could shape future immigration enforcement and presidential authority regarding border security. Lawyers should closely monitor this case, as it signals potential upcoming Supreme Court decisions that could establish new precedents in immigration law.

The current *Supreme Court relist watch* reveals a dynamic period for the Court, with several *cert petitions relisted SCOTUS* for further consideration. Many of these new relists involve multiple related cases, and the federal government is advocating for review in three of them, underscoring the broad reach of these potential decisions. The Court's decision to grant *Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Brown cert* is particularly relevant for practitioners dealing with *bankruptcy arbitration agreements enforcement*, as it will clarify the boundaries of judicial discretion in this area.

Attorneys advising clients on matters of immigration, bankruptcy, and arbitration enforcement should pay close attention to these developments. The outcomes of cases like *Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services* and *Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Brown* could significantly impact litigation strategies and client advice, establishing new legal precedents that reshape these critical areas of law.

Lawyers should closely monitor these relisted cases, particularly Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center and Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Brown, as they signal potential upcoming Supreme Court decisions that could establish new precedents in immigration law, bankruptcy, and arbitration enforcement, directly impacting client advice and litigation strategies.

Source: Original reporting via SCOTUSblog