By Tony Mauro, Supreme Court Brief

The U.S. Supreme Court returns to the bench December 1 to begin hearing arguments in 12 cases and to hand down some decisions, finally.

The court has issued four unsigned per curiam opinions since starting its term Oct. 6, but it usually hands down its first signed decision sometime in November. The court announced it will issue opinions on Dec. 2.This will be the first time since 2009 that the court has not issued a signed opinion before December, according to Kedar Bhatia, who tracks court statistics for SCOTUSblog. With all the emergency matters that have been occupying justices so far this term—same-sex marriage, voting rights and the like—old-fashioned decision-making may have had to wait.

As for oral arguments, the most high-profile cases of the December cycle will be argued in the first week.

On Dec. 1, the court will consider Elonis v. United States, which asks whether the federal law against threats applies to rap-like postings on Facebook. John Elwood, appellate partner at Vinson & Elkins, will argue for defendant Anthony Elonis.

His angry postings about his estranged wife were meant to be “cathartic,” not threatening, Elwood says, but Elonis was convicted under the threat law. The case came to Elwood through the University of Virginia School of Law Supreme Court Litigation Clinic. Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben, the office’s criminal law expert, will defend the standard under which Elonis was convicted.

Two days later the court will hear Young v. United Parcel Service, testing whether the Pregnancy Discrimination Act requires employers to accommodate pregnant workers in the same ways that it provides alternate assignments for others.

University of Michigan Law School professor Sam Bagenstos an employment and disabilities expert, will argue for UPS employee Peggy Young.

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher New York partner Caitlin Halligan represents UPS. Halligan has argued three cases before the high court as New York’s solicitor general, one while in private practice at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, and one while in the Manhattan district attorney’s office. Her nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was withdrawn in 2013 after the Senate failed to act.

UPS claims its policy is “pregnancy neutral,” but the case took an unusual turn October 24 when Halligan’s colleague Mark Perry as counsel of record told the court in the merits brief that UPS will from now on allow for accommodations for pregnant workers.

Other cases set for argument in December will showcase first-time advocates and veterans alike. On December 3 Carlo Van den Bosch, co-chair of the intellectual property practice at Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton is set to argue for his first time at the high court. He’ll represent Hana Bank in a trademark “tacking” case, Hana Financial Inc. v. Hana Bank.

Tacking an older trademark onto a new one allows the owner to retain priority ownership as the first to use the mark. The issue before the court is who determines whether on old mark can be tacked to the new one: a judge or a jury. Arguing for Hana Financial is Paul Hughes, a Mayer Brown senior associate also making his debut at the high court.

Former solicitor general Seth Waxman of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr , who argued his 70th case in November, returns to the lectern for Number 71 on December 9. He’ll represent Bank of America in Gelboim v. Bank of America, a civil procedure case that asks: “Whether and in what circumstances is the dismissal of an action that has been consolidated with other suits immediately appealable?”

Arguing for the plaintiff will be Thomas Goldstein of Goldstein & Russell, making his 33rd appearance at the high court. The last time Waxman and Goldstein squared off against each other was in the 2000 case Bartnicki v. Vopper, when Waxman was solicitor general.

William Jay of Goodwin Procter filed an unusual amicus curiae brief in the Gelboim case on behalf of a group of retired U.S. District Court judges including Michael Mukasey, the former U.S. attorney general. They argued that District Court judges are “best positioned to assess when one or more constituent claims may be appropriate for separate appeal while the rest of the consolidated litigation remains pending.”

Jay will be arguing in a case set for December 2: B&B Hardware Inc. v. Hargis Industries, another trademark case. Jay represents B&B Hardware, while former acting solicitor general Neal Katyal of Hogan Lovells will argue for Hargis.

Representatives of the solicitor general’s office are arguing in 11 of the 12 cases set for argument in December, so it will be all hands on deck. SG Donald Verrilli Jr. will argue in the UPS pregnancy case on the side of the employee. And one assistant to the solicitor general will be making her first Supreme Court argument: Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the government in United States v. June, one of two Federal Tort Claims Act cases the court will hear in Dec. 10.

IMAGE: Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher’s Caitlin Halligan Diego M. Radzinschi

For more on this story go to: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/supremecourtbrief/id=1202677421162/Justices-Return-to-Consider-Facebook-Threats-Pregnancy-Discrimination#ixzz3KBRY5Rz9