| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19-896 | 3rd Cir. | Jan 11, 2022 | TBD | TBD | TBD | OT 2021 |
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. |
We can announce, however, that we'll be liveblogging the release of orders from today's conference AND opinions, starting at around 9:25 @SCOTUSblog. Please join us to discuss the leak, pending opinions, and whatever other SCOTUS-related issues are on your mind. https://twitter.com/AHoweBlogger/status/1524788054434660353
#SCOTUS will release opinions from argued cases at 10 am on Monday. The Court does not announce in advance how many opinions it will release or which ones.
NEW: Next Monday will be a Supreme Court opinion day. Starting at 10 a.m. EDT, the court expects to issue one or more decisions in argued cases from the current term.
Just in: The Supreme Court denies a request to block the execution of Clarence Dixon, an Arizona man who is scheduled to be put to death today. Dixon's attorneys argued that, because of a mental illness, Dixon is not mentally fit to be executed under the Eighth Amendment.
On this date in “How Appealing” history: At this very moment twenty years ago, this blog came into existence, boosting your humble author from nearly total obscurity to perhaps a modicum less than nearly total obscurity.
On this happy occasion, I once https://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/2022/05/06/#179553
How the unprecedented Supreme Court leak may have been a response to an earlier disclosure about the justices' private deliberations. @TomGoldsteinSB on what it all means for the court and its secrets.

How the leak might have happened - SCOTUSblog
Among the debates generated by the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion in Dobbs is whether the leaker was...
www.scotusblog.com
JUST IN: The Supreme Court confirms the authenticity of the draft opinion revealed last night by Politico. The chief justice has ordered an investigation into the leak.