|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-654||D.C. Cir.||Not Argued||Jun 4, 2018||n/a||Per Curiam||OT 2017|
Holding: The litigation over Jane Doe’s temporary restraining order allowing her to obtain an abortion despite the policy of the Office of Refugee Resettlement falls squarely within established practice to reverse or vacate the judgment below and remand with a direction to dismiss when a civil case from a court in the federal system has become moot while on its way to the Supreme Court.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 03 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 4, 2017)|
|Nov 03 2017||Motion to lodge non-record material under seal filed by petitioners.|
|Nov 08 2017||Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2017.|
|Nov 17 2017||Response to Motion Requested. (Due December 18, 2017)|
|Nov 30 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Legal Center for Defense of Life filed.|
|Dec 04 2017||Brief amici curiae of The States of Texas, et al. filed.|
|Dec 04 2017||Brief of respondent Rochelle Garza, as Guardian ad Litem to Unaccompanied Minor J.D. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 18 2017||Motion to lodge non-record material under seal with redacted copies for the public record filed by petitioners.|
|Dec 18 2017||Letter in response to the motion to lodge non-record material under seal with redacted copies for the public record filed by respondent.|
|Dec 19 2017||Reply of petitioners Eric D. Hargan, et al. filed.|
|Dec 20 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2018.|
|Jan 04 2018||Rescheduled.|
|Jan 08 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/12/2018.|
|Jan 11 2018||Letter of January 11, 2018 from counsel for respondent received. (Distributed)|
|Jan 16 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/19/2018.|
|Jan 18 2018||Letter of January 18, 2018, from counsel for the petitioners received. (Distributed)|
|Feb 05 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.|
|Feb 20 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2018.|
|Feb 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/2/2018.|
|Feb 26 2018||Record Requested.|
|Feb 26 2018||Record received from the U.S.D.C. for the District of Columbia. The record is electronic and available on PACER. SEALED materials transmitted separately.|
|Feb 26 2018||Record received from the U.S.C.A. for the D.C. Circuit. The record is electronic and available on PACER. SEALED materials transmitted separately.|
|Mar 12 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/16/2018.|
|Mar 19 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/23/2018.|
|Mar 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/29/2018.|
|Apr 02 2018||Letter of respondent Rochelle Garza, as Guardian ad Litem to Unaccompanied Minor J.D. filed.|
|Apr 09 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.|
|Apr 16 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/20/2018.|
|Apr 23 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/27/2018.|
|May 07 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/10/2018.|
|May 14 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/17/2018.|
|May 21 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/24/2018.|
|May 29 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/31/2018.|
|Jun 04 2018||Motion to lodge non-record material under seal with redacted copies for the public record GRANTED.|
|Jun 04 2018||The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The en banc order of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded to that court with instructions to direct the District Court to dismiss the relevant individual claim for injunctive relief as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950). Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion)|
|Jul 06 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
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.