|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-895||M.D. Ala.||Nov 12, 2014||Mar 25, 2015||5-4||Breyer||OT 2014|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among counsel to the petitioners in this case.
Holding: The district court’s analysis of the racial gerrymandering claim as referring to the state “as a whole,” rather than district by district, was legally erroneous; the district court also erred in holding that the Alabama Democratic Conference lacked standing. Moreover, the district court did not properly calculate “predominance” in its alternative holding that race was not the predominant motivating factor in the creation of any of the challenged districts. Finally, the district court’s other alternative holding – that the challenged districts would satisfy strict scrutiny – rests on a misperception of the law: Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act does not require a covered jurisdiction to maintain a particular numerical minority percentage. Instead, it requires the jurisdiction to maintain a minority’s ability to elect a preferred candidate of choice.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on March 25, 2015. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Thomas and Alito joined. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 23 2014||Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due February 26, 2014)|
|Jan 23 2014||Appendix of Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al. filed.|
|Feb 4 2014||Order extending time to file response to statement as to jurisdiction to and including March 28, 2014.|
|Mar 24 2014||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including April 21, 2014.|
|Apr 21 2014||Motion to dismiss or affirm filed by appellees Alabama, et al.|
|May 2 2014||Reply of appellants Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al. filed.|
|May 6 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 22, 2014.|
|May 27 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 29, 2014.|
|Jun 2 2014||PROBABLE JURISDICTION NOTED limited to Question 2 presented by the statement as to jurisdiction. Probable jurisdiction is noted in No. 13-1138 limited to Question 1 presented by the statement as to jurisdiction. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.|
|Jul 10 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the appellees.|
|Jul 22 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and appellants' briefs on the merits is extended to and including August 13, 2014.|
|Jul 22 2014||The time to file appellees' briefs on the merits is extended to and including October 9, 2014.|
|Aug 13 2014||Brief of appellants Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al. filed.|
|Aug 13 2014||Joint appendix filed. VIDED. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Aug 15 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the appellants.|
|Aug 20 2014||Brief amicus curiae of the United States in support of neither party filed. VIDED.|
|Aug 20 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law in support of neither party filed. VIDED.|
|Aug 20 2014||Brief amicus curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. filed. VIDED.|
|Aug 20 2014||Brief amici curiae of North Carolina Litigants filed. VIDED.|
|Aug 20 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Brennan Center for Justice at N.Y.U. School of Law filed. VIDED.|
|Sep 4 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 12, 2014. VIDED.|
|Sep 8 2014||Record requested from U.S.D.C. for Middle District of Alabama.|
|Sep 9 2014||The Record received from U.S.D.C. for Middle District of Alabama is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Sep 19 2014||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 24 2014||Application (14A335) to file a consolidated appellees' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit, submitted to Justice Thomas. VIDED|
|Sep 29 2014||Application (14A335) granted by Justice Thomas to file a consolidated appellees' brief on the merits in excess of the word limit provided that the brief does not exceed 22,500 words.|
|Oct 9 2014||Brief of appellees Alabama, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Oct 15 2014||Motion for divided argument filed by appellants. VIDED.|
|Oct 15 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for enlargement of time for oral argument, for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, and for divided argument filed. VIDED.|
|Oct 16 2014||Brief amici curiae of Speaker of the Alabama House of Representatives and President Pro Tempore of the Alabama Senate filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Oct 16 2014||Brief amici curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Oct 16 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Dalton J. Oldham filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Oct 27 2014||Reply of appellants Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 30 2014||Proposal of counsel for the appellees to lodge copies of the complaint in Figgs, et al. v. Quitman County, et al. VIDED|
|Oct 31 2014||Motion for divided argument filed by appellants GRANTED.|
|Oct 31 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for enlargement of time for oral argument, for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, and for divided argument GRANTED and the time is to be divided as follows: 30 minutes for appellants, 30 minutes for appellees, and 10 minutes for the Solicitor General as amicus curiae. VIDED|
|Nov 12 2014||Argued. For appellants in 13-895: Eric Schnapper, Seattle, Wash. For appellants in 13-1138: Richard Pildes, New York, N. Y. For United States, as amicus curiae: Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For appellees: Andrew L. Brasher, Solicitor General, Montgomery, Ala.|
|Jan 30 2015||Motion to file a supplemental brief after argument filed by appellants Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al. (Distributed)|
|Feb 23 2015||Motion to file a supplemental brief after argument filed by appellants GRANTED.|
|Feb 26 2015||Motion to file a supplemental brief after argument filed by appellees Alabama, et al. (Distributed)|
|Mar 9 2015||Motion to file a supplemental brief after argument filed by respondent GRANTED.|
|Mar 25 2015||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|Apr 27 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
As a lawyer, Leondra Kruger argued 12 cases at the U.S. Supreme Court. As a California Supreme Court justice, she has a liberal-leaning record but has sometimes voted with more conservative colleagues in divided cases. Here's @AHoweBlogger's profile:
Profile of a potential nominee: Leondra Kruger - SCOTUSblog
During a 2020 Democratic presidential primary debate, then-candidate Joe Biden pledged that, if elected, he would nomi...
Two candidates to replace Breyer stand apart: Leondra Kruger and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Kruger is six years younger. Jackson recently underwent a Senate confirmation. And the role of Ron Klain, Biden's chief of staff, may be pivotal.
How Biden will choose the next Supreme Court nominee - SCOTUSblog
With today’s reporting that Justice Stephen Breyer intends to retire, we now kick off our analysis of potentia...
Stephen Breyer wrote major opinions favoring abortion rights, demarcating the separation of powers, and rejecting a challenge to Obamacare. In his later years, he questioned the constitutionality of the death penalty. Our retrospective, via @AHoweBlogger:
Stephen Breyer, pragmatic liberal, will retire at end of term - SCOTUSblog
Justice Stephen Breyer, a devoted pragmatist and the senior member of the Supreme Court’s liberal wing, will r...
BREAKING: Per @PeteWilliamsNBC of @NBCNews, Justice Stephen Breyer is retiring. The 83-year-old Breyer, a pragmatic liberal who has served on the Supreme Court for nearly 28 years, is expected to tell the White House imminently of his intention to step down.
NEWS: Supreme Court Justice Breyer to retire, @PeteWilliamsNBC reporting live on @NBCNews Special Report
A rule that allows SCOTUS to hear cases before appeals courts weigh in used to be very rare. But in the past three years, it's become far more common. And the justices haven't said why.
@steve_vladeck explains the resurgent writ of "cert before judgment."
The rise of certiorari before judgment - SCOTUSblog
For obvious reasons, the Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to grant certiorari in a pair of cases challenging...
Sonia Sotomayor appeared this morning on @TODAYshow to promote her new children's book, "Just Help!: How to Build a Better World." She spoke briefly about the public's perception of the court. Here's the interview: https://www.today.com/video/justice-sotomayor-on-new-book-supreme-court-s-credibility-loss-of-her-mother-131639365722