US Supreme Court to hear Andy Warhol copyright case News
pvdberg / Pixabay
US Supreme Court to hear Andy Warhol copyright case

The US Supreme Court Monday issued an order list adding three new cases to its merits docket: National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, Cruz v. Arizona and Andy Warhol Foundation, Inc. v. Goldsmith. The three cases involve an animal welfare regulation, criminal procedure, and a copyright dispute.

National Pork Producers Council v. Ross concerns Proposition 12, a California regulation mandating certain space allowances for pigs. If farms⁠ do not satisfy the space allowances, they may not sell pork in California. This includes both in-state and out-of-state farms.

After the Ninth Circuit ruled against the council, it appealed to the Supreme Court. The council asked the court to declare that a state law which has “dramatic economic effects largely outside of the state and requires pervasive changes to an integrated nationwide industry” is a violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause. The Dormant Commerce Clause prevents state from instituting legislation that “discriminates against or excessively burdens interstate commerce.”

The court granted review of only one issue in Cruz v. Arizona: “Whether the Arizona Supreme Court’s 1 holding that Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(g) precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state-law ground for the judgment.” In some criminal cases, federal courts may review state court decisions if the judgement turns on federal law. A request for federal review is called a writ of Habeas Corpus. If the state court judgement rests upon both federal and state law, the Supreme Court may not review the case if the state law is (1) adequate and (2) independent grounds for the judgement.

The Arizona Supreme Court denied Cruz’s petition under 32.1(g) because it found that there was not a “significant change in the law” since his judgement or sentencing. Cruz argued that this finding violates two prior Supreme Court cases and says the Arizona Supreme Court did not consider his claim under federal law.

Andy Warhol Foundation, Inc. v. Goldsmith involves a series of paintings by pop artist Andy Warhol based on a 1984 photograph of Prince by Lynn Goldsmith. The foundation argues that Warhol permissibly used Goldsmith’s work to create a new message. After the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for Goldsmith, the Warhol Foundation asked the Supreme Court to decide whether a court should disregard the original meaning of new art when it is “recognizably derived” from source material, as the Second Circuit ruled.

THIS DAY @ LAW

Line of Demarcation divides the New World between Spain and Portugal

On May 4, 1493, Pope Alexander VI promulgated the Line of Demarcation, dividing the New World between Spain and Portugal in response the return of Christopher Columbus from his discovery of the American continents. However, neither country was entirely satisfied with the placement of the Line. A year later on June 7, 1494, the two nations signed the Treaty of Tordesillas, which moved the Line of Demarcation further west, giving Portugal claim to Brazil.

Kent State student shootings precipitated lawsuits

On May 4, 1970, National Guardsmen at Kent State University opened fire on students protesting the US invasion of Cambodia, killing four.

Review a legal chronology of the Kent State shootings, from May 5, 1970 (the day the FBI investigation started) to January 4, 1979 (the day the state of Ohio reached an out-of-court settlement for $675,000 with victims and relatives of victims).