No tariff choice from the US Supreme Court right this moment

\

For the legal fans out there, here is an LLM-generated review of the two decisions today.

Berk v. Choy

The Court held that Delaware’s requirement for an “affidavit of merit” in medical malpractice suits does not apply in federal court. Petitioner Harold Berk’s suit had been dismissed for failing to provide an expert’s attestation of the claim’s validity as required by state law. Writing for the majority, Justice Barrett concluded that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 governs the information required at the outset of litigation, and because it only requires a “short and plain statement of the claim,” it displaces contrary state evidentiary hurdles.

Ellingburg v. United States

The Court unanimously ruled that restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) is criminal punishment. Holsey Ellingburg challenged the retroactive application of the MVRA to his pre-enactment crime as a violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause. Justice Kavanaugh noted the MVRA’s text, which labels restitution a “penalty” and integrates it into criminal sentencing, makes its punitive nature “abundantly clear”. This classification ensures that restitution is subject to constitutional protections against retroactive punishment.