Breaking News

Today’s Orders

The Court has granted certiorari in Kiyemba v. Obama (08-1234) and the combined cases of  Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha v. Regal-Beloit Corporation (08-1553) and Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Regal-Beloit Corporation (08-1554). The full order list is available here.

Docket: 08-1234
Title: Kiyemba v. Obama
Issue: Whether a federal court exercising its habeas jurisdiction, as confirmed by Boumediene v. Bush, has no power to order the release of prisoners held by the Executive for seven years, when the Executive detention is indefinite and without authorization in law, and release into the continental United States is the only possible effective remedy.

  • Opinion below (D.C. Circuit)
  • Petition for certiorari
  • Brief in opposition
  • Petitioner’s reply
  • Brief amicus curiae of Federal Public Defender for District Court of Oregon (in support of petitioners)
  • Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Liberties Union (in support of petitioners)
  • Brief amici curiae of Association of the Bar of the City of New York et al. (in support of petitioners)
  • Petitioners’ counsel’s letter of June 25
  • Solicitor General’s letter of June 25
  • Petitioners’ counsel’s letter of Sept. 10
  • Solicitor General’s letter of Sept. 23

Docket: 08-1553; 08-1554
Title: Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha v. Regal-Beloit Corporation; Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Regal-Beloit Corporation
Issue: Whether the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, which governs certain rail and motor transportation by common carriers within the United States, 49 U.S.C. §§ 11706 (rail carriers) & 14706 (motor carriers), applies to the inland rail leg of an intermodal shipment from overseas when the shipment was made under a “through” bill of lading issued by an ocean carrier that extended the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30701.

  • Opinion below (9th Circuit)
  • Brief in opposition

For 08-1553:

  • Petition for certiorari
  • Petitioner’s reply

For 08-1554:

  • Petition for certiorari
  • Petitioner’s reply