|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-770||2d Cir.||Nov 1, 2012||Feb 19, 2013||6-3||Kennedy||OT 2012|
Holding: The rule in Michigan v. Summers that officers executing a search warrant are permitted “to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted” is limited to the immediate vicinity of the premises to be searched and does not apply when a recent occupant of the premises was detained at a point beyond any reasonable understanding of the immediate vicinity of the premises in question.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy on February 19, 2013. Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion in which Justice Ginsburg and Justice Kagan joined. Justice Breyer filled a dissenting opinion in which Justice Thomas and Justice Alito joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 16 2011||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 19, 2012)|
|Jan 12 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including February 21, 2012.|
|Jan 19 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Feb 15 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including March 22, 2012.|
|Mar 19 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including April 5, 2012.|
|Mar 26 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including May 3, 2012.|
|May 3 2012||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|May 14 2012||Reply of petitioner Chunon L. Bailey, aka Polo filed.|
|May 15 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 31, 2012.|
|Jun 4 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 8 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 3, 2012.|
|Jun 8 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 17, 2012.|
|Jul 16 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or neither party received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Jul 23 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, October 30, 2012|
|Aug 2 2012||Transcripts received from U.S.D.C. for Eastern District of New York. (10 volumes)|
|Aug 3 2012||Joint appendix filed.|
|Aug 3 2012||Brief of petitioner Chunon L. Bailey, aka Polo filed.|
|Aug 10 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Aug 10 2012||Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union, et al. filed.|
|Aug 10 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Federal Defenders filed.|
|Aug 13 2012||Record from U.S.C.A. for Second Circuit is electronic.|
|Aug 15 2012||Record from U.S.D.C. for Eastern District of New York is electronic.|
|Aug 24 2012||CIRCULATED.|
|Aug 27 2012||Order further extending time to file respondent's brief on the merits to and including September 20, 2012.|
|Sep 20 2012||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of Michigan, Twenty Three (23) Other States, and One (1) Territory filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 15 2012||Reply of petitioner Chunon L. Bailey, aka Polo filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 29 2012||RESET FOR ARGUMENT ON Thursday, November 1, 1012.|
|Nov 1 2012||Argued. For petitioner: Kannon K. Shanmugam, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Jeffrey B. Wall, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Feb 19 2013||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Ginsburg and Kagan, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined.|
|Mar 25 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Apr 18 2013||Record (Transcripts) returned to U.S.D.C. for the Eastern District of New York.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...