Editor's Note :

Editor's Note :

We expect additional orders from the December 9 conference on Monday at 9:30 a.m. There is also a possibility of opinions on Monday.

Cases


Sitting Docket Title(link to Wiki page) Issue Argument(link to transcript) Decision(link to opinion)
16-610Alaska Oil and Gas Association v. JewellWhether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's exceedingly permissive standard improperly allows the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to designate huge geographic areas as “critical habitat” under the Endangered Species Act when much of the designated area fails to meet the statutory criteria. (Opinion by )
16-605Town of Chester v. Laroe Estates, Inc.Whether intervenors participating in a lawsuit as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) must have Article III standing (as three circuits have held), or whether Article III of the Constitution is satisfied so long as there is a valid case or controversy between the named parties (as seven circuits have held). (Opinion by )
16-589Morva v. ZookWhether a state rule that excludes as irrelevant evidence that a capital defendant is unlikely to pose a risk of future violence in prison is contrary to or an unreasonable application of this court's precedent under the Eighth Amendment and due process clause. (Opinion by )
16-577Shelton v. McQuigginWhether, under Schriro v. Landigran, a habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing where his allegations would entitle him to relief and are not contravened by the record, as at least three circuits have held, or whether the petitioner must already have factual support for his allegations, as four other circuits have now held. (Opinion by )
16-679McFadden v. United States(1) Whether and under what circumstances overwhelming evidence of an element omitted from a criminal jury instruction is a sufficient basis for finding the error harmless; and (2) whether proof that the defendant knew the name and physiological effects of the product he was selling compels a jury to conclude that the defendant “knew he was dealing with a ‘controlled substance’” as required by McFadden v. United States. (Opinion by )
Term Snapshot
Awards