At NAFUSA’s yearly conference, an expert on the United States Supreme Court presents a review of the term just ended. Adam Liptak, left, who covers the court for The New York Times, gave the presentation in New York City in 2010. In an article in today’s Times entitled Court To Weigh Arizona Statute On Immigration, Liptak writes, “In the space of a month, the Supreme Court has thrust itself into the center of American political life, agreeing to hear three major cases that could help determine which party controls the House of Representatives and whether President Obama wins a second term.”

Before the NAFUSA conference in Atlanta in October, the court will have heard the Arizona immigration case, reviewed the 2010 health care overhaul law and the Texas redistricting dispute. As Liptak points out, “…the current term may be most reminiscent of the showdown between the Supreme Court and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1936, when the court struck down major pieces of New Deal legislation as well as a New York law establishing a minimum wage for women and children.” On the other hand, Liptak says, “…the court may yet avoid creating political earthquakes.”

On Moday, January 9, 2012, the Supreme Court heard arguments on the major voting rights case from Texas. Liptak reported in The Times in an article entitled Justices Grapple With Voting Rights Case That Could Help Tip the House the case “could help decide the control of the House.”

What ever happens, the review of the 2011-2012 term at the Atlanta conference should be of considerable interest.