|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Issues: (1) Whether strict First Amendment scrutiny applies to a criminal law that prohibits nonconsensual dissemination of non-obscene nude or sexually oriented visual material; and (2) whether the First Amendment requires a law that prohibits nonconsensual dissemination of non-obscene nude or sexually oriented visual material to impose a requirement of specific intent to harm or harass the individual(s) depicted.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 10 2020||Application (19A777) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 16, 2020 to February 14, 2020, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.|
|Jan 14 2020||Application (19A777) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until February 14, 2020.|
|Feb 14 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 20, 2020)|
|Mar 04 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Bethany Austin.|
|Mar 19 2020||Waiver of right of respondent Illinois to respond filed.|
|Mar 19 2020||Brief amici curiae of American Booksellers Association, et al. filed.|
|Mar 20 2020||Letter of Bethany Austin not accepted for filing. (March 20, 2020 - Corrected version to be submitted)|
|Mar 20 2020||Letter of petitioner Bethany Austin received.|
|Mar 20 2020||Brief amici curiae of The Cato Institute filed.|
|Mar 20 2020||Brief amici curiae of First Amendment Lawyers Association and the Marion B. Brechner First Amendment Project filed.|
|Mar 20 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Woodhull Freedom Foundation filed.|
|Mar 20 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Justice filed.|
|Mar 25 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2020.|
|Apr 02 2020||Response Requested. (Due May 4, 2020)|
|Apr 24 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 4, 2020 to July 3, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 27 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 6, 2020. See Rule 30.1.|
|Jul 06 2020||Brief of respondent State of Illinois in opposition filed.|
|Jul 22 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.|
|Jul 27 2020||Reply of petitioner Bethany Austin filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 05 2020||Petition DENIED.|
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
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.