|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20A90||2d Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether Executive Order 202.68 by Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-N.Y.) violates the free exercise clause as targeting and a religious gerrymander when Cuomo made clear through unambiguous statements that the order was targeted at a religious minority’s practices and traditions; and (2) whether the provisions of that order limiting in-person “house of worship” attendance to 10 or 25 people, while allowing numerous secular businesses to operate without any capacity restrictions, violate the free exercise clause on its face by disfavoring worship.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 16 2020||Application (20A90) for injunctive relief, submitted to Justice Breyer.|
|Nov 16 2020||Response to application (20A90) requested by Justice Breyer, due Friday, November 20, by 2 p.m.|
|Nov 17 2020||Motion for leave to file amici brief and motion for leave to file brief in compliance with Rule 33.2 filed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, et al.|
|Nov 17 2020||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Muslim Public Affairs Council, et al.|
|Nov 17 2020||Motion for leave to file amicus brief and motion for leave to file brief in compliance with Rule 33.2 filed by Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.|
|Nov 19 2020||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by American Medical Association, et al.|
|Nov 20 2020||Response to application from respondent Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor of New York filed.|
|Nov 20 2020||Motion for leave to file amicus brief and motion for leave to file brief in compliance with Rule 33.2 filed by First Liberty Institute.|
|Nov 20 2020||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, et al.|
|Nov 20 2020||Motion for leave to file amicus brief and motion for leave to file brief in compliance with Rule 33.2 filed by Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.|
|Nov 22 2020||Reply of applicants Agudath Israel, et al. filed.|
|Nov 25 2020||Application (20A90) referred to the Court.|
|Nov 25 2020||The application for injunctive relief presented to Justice Breyer and by him referred to the Court is granted in part. Respondent is enjoined from enforcing Executive Order 202.68’s 10- and 25-person occupancy limits on applicants, including Agudath Israel of America’s current New York-based affiliates, pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this order shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the order shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court. Chief Justice Roberts, dissenting: I dissent for the reasons set out in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U. S. ___ (2020) (Roberts, C. J., dissenting). Justice Breyer, with whom Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan join, dissenting: I dissent for the reasons set out in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U. S. ___ (2020) (Breyer, J., dissenting). Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Kagan joins, dissenting: I dissent for the reasons set out in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U. S. ___ (2020) (Sotomayor, J., dissenting).|
NEW: SCOTUS agrees to take up two new cases. Here's the orders list. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030121zor_m6hn.pdf
#SCOTUS grants US v. Vaello-Madero, a challenge to exclusion of Puerto Rico residents from eligibility for Supplemental Social Security Income program, which provides benefits to poor disabled adults & children
Good morning. It’s Monday, and it’s March!
At 9:30 a.m. EST, SCOTUS will release orders from Friday’s conference.
At 10:00, the court will consider an appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges. More from George Quillin & Jeanne Gills.
Justices to consider appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges - SCOTUSblog
The justices continue their light load for the February argument session next week. First up is Monday’s Unite...
BREAKING: SCOTUS orders California’s Santa Clara County to allow churches to hold indoor services. Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan dissent. Here’s the short shadow docket order.
#SCOTUS grants emergency request from northern California churches to allow indoor worship services pending appeal, says result is "clearly dictated" by recent decision. Kagan dissents, joined by Breyer & Sotomayor: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022621zr_1bo2.pdf
Just in: SCOTUS opinions expected next Thursday.
#SCOTUS website indicates that the Court will release orders from today's conference on Monday morning, March 1, at 9:30 am, with opinions again on Thursday, March 4, at 10 am. Justices will also hear oral arguments next week, including in Arizona voting dispute on Tuesday.
Apparently all the action today at #SCOTUS was not limited to opinion announcements at 10 am. Major new cert. petition filed today challenging Harvard admissions policy. https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1364962610177843210
NEW: Supreme Court asked to outlaw race-based college admissions. Group challenging Harvard admissions policy says it files appeal asking court to over 2003 Grutter decision.
SCOTUS rules against a college student who tried to sue police officers after they mistook him for a criminal suspect and tackled/beat him. The unanimous ruling involves a technical interpretation of the "judgment bar" under the Federal Tort Claims Act. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-546_7mip.pdf
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.