April argument schedule, day by day (UPDATED)
on Feb 11, 2014 at 1:53 pm
UPDATED Wednesday 5:12 p.m. Justice Alito will be participating in the consideration of the last case scheduled for the April arguments, case 12-786. See this note on the Court’s docket for that case:
|Jan 17 2014||Justice Alito is no longer recused in this case.|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday released the oral argument calendar for the final scheduled sitting of the current Term — the last two weeks of April. The case on copyright issues on streaming TV programs on the Internet is set for April 22. The two cases on cellphone privacy are due to be heard back to back on April 29. All sessions begin at 10 a.m.; there are no afternoon arguments scheduled in this sitting.
Following the jump are the daily lists, with a brief summary of the issues at stake in each case. Links are provided to the case pages on this blog.
Monday, April 21:
Argentina v. NML Capital — right of creditors holding Argentine defaulted government debt to seek data worldwide about the government’s assets
POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola — private right to sue to challenge beverage labeling as misleading (Justices Alito and Breyer are recused)
Tuesday, April 22:
Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus — right to sue to challenge a state law forbidding false statements in election campaigns
ABC TV v. Aereo — Copyright Act application to streaming of free broadcast TV programs via the Internet to paying customers (Justice Alito is recused)
Wednesday, April 23:
United States v. Clarke — right to a hearing on whether the IRS improperly issued a summons for taxpayer data
CTS Corp. v. Waldburger — federal preemption of state law time limits for filing lawsuits to recover for toxic waste pollution
Monday, April 28:
Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments — scope of the Patent Act requirement that invention claims be clear and distinct
Lane v. Franks — First Amendment challenge by public employee to retaliation after having testified truthfully under subpoena; also, question of qualified immunity to damages
Tuesday, April 29:
Riley v. California — police authority under Fourth Amendment to search a smartphone taken from an individual at the time of arrest
United States v. Wurie — police authority under Fourth Amendment to search a flip-style cellphone taken from an individual at the time of arrest
Wednesday, Apil 30:
Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tehnologies — definition of inducement of others to infringe a patent (Justice Alito is recused)
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel to the petitioner in Lane v. Franks and as co-counsel to the petitioner in POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola.