|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Jan 11, 2022
Issue: Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 08 2019||Application (19A515) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 18, 2019 to December 18, 2019, submitted to Justice Alito.|
|Nov 12 2019||Application (19A515) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until December 18, 2019.|
|Dec 06 2019||Application (19A515) to extend further the time from December 18, 2019 to January 17, 2020, submitted to Justice Alito.|
|Dec 10 2019||Application (19A515) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until January 17, 2020.|
|Jan 17 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 20, 2020)|
|Jan 17 2020||Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and shouild not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.|
|Feb 13 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 20, 2020 to March 23, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Feb 14 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 23, 2020.|
|Mar 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 23, 2020 to April 22, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including April 22, 2020.|
|Apr 22 2020||Brief of respondent Antonio Arteaga-Martinez in opposition filed.|
|May 08 2020||Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from May 12, 2020 to May 19, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|May 08 2020||Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ certiorari until May 19, 2020, granted.|
|May 14 2020||Reply of petitioners Matthew T. Albence, Acting Director of U.S. Immigration, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|May 19 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.|
|Jun 08 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/11/2020.|
|Jul 01 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 7/1/2021.|
|Aug 23 2021||Petition GRANTED.|
|Aug 23 2021||As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.|
|Sep 28 2021||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Oct 01 2021||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 14, 2021. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including November 22, 2021.|
|Oct 06 2021||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Tae D. Johnson, et al.|
|Oct 14 2021||Brief of petitioners Tae D. Johnson, et al. filed.|
|Oct 18 2021||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioners GRANTED.|
|Nov 17 2021||ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, January 11, 2022.|
|Nov 17 2021||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 3rd Circuit.|
|Nov 22 2021||Brief of respondent Antonio Arteaga-Martinez filed.|
|Nov 24 2021||Brief amici curiae of Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, et al filed (also in 20-322). VIDED.|
|Nov 29 2021||Brief amici curiae of Former Immigration Judges and Board of Immigration Appeals Members filed (also in 20-322). VIDED.|
|Nov 29 2021||Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed (also in 20-322). VIDED.|
|Nov 30 2021||The record from the U.S.C.A. 3rd Circuit and for the U.S.D.C. Middle District of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg) has been electronically filed.|
|Dec 08 2021||CIRCULATED|
|Dec 22 2021||Reply of petitioners Tae D. Johnson, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2022||Argued. For petitioners: Austin Raynor, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Pratik A. Shah, Washington, D. C.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.