|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1307||D.C. Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2017|
Issues: (1) Whether military commissions' assumption of the federal courts' subject-matter jurisdiction over wholly domestic crimes, such as conspiracy, violates Article III's reservation of the “trial of all crimes” to the judiciary; (2) whether the Military Commissions Act's codification of crimes not otherwise recognized as war crimes under international law was intended to apply retroactively and, if so, whether that violates the ex post facto clause; and (3) whether the Military Commissions Act's establishment of a segregated criminal justice system in which only non-citizens are subject to military commission jurisdiction violates the constitutional guarantee of equal justice under law.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 27 2017||Application (16A770) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 26, 2017 to March 28, 2017, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Feb 02 2017||Application (16A770) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until March 28, 2017.|
|Mar 28 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 31, 2017)|
|Mar 28 2017||Appendix of Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul filed.|
|May 24 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including June 30, 2017.|
|May 30 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Justice Richard J. Goldstone filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amici curiae of International and Constitutional Law Experts filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amicus curiae of National Institute of Military Justice filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amici curiae of United States Council of Muslim Organizations, et al., filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Constitutional Rights filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amici curiae of Karen Korematsu, et al. filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Jens David Ohlin filed.|
|May 31 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Mr. Ammar al Baluchi filed.|
|Jun 30 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including July 31, 2017.|
|Jul 25 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including August 30, 2017.|
|Aug 28 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including September 6, 2017.|
|Sep 06 2017||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Sep 19 2017||Reply of petitioner Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul filed.|
|Sep 20 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2017.|
|Oct 10 2017||Petition DENIED. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.