Breaking News
Enter your email address to subscribe to updates to this case (by doing so, you are accepting the terms in our privacy policy):

Babcock v. Saul

Share
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
20-480 6th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD OT 2021

Issue: Whether a civil service pension received for federal civilian employment as a “military technician (dual status)” is “a payment based wholly on service as a member of a uniformed service” for the purposes of the Social Security Act’s windfall elimination provision.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Oct 08 2020Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 13, 2020)
Oct 08 2020Pursuant 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 should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.
Oct 16 2020Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 13, 2020 to December 14, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
Oct 19 2020Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 14, 2020.
Dec 03 2020Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 14, 2020 to January 13, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
Dec 04 2020Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 13, 2021.
Jan 13 2021Brief of respondent Andrew M. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security in opposition filed.
Jan 27 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
Jan 27 2021Reply of petitioner David Babcock filed. (Distributed)
Feb 22 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/26/2021.
Mar 01 2021Petition GRANTED.
Mar 01 2021As 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.