|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.|
The court has rescheduled oral argument in Shinn v. Ramirez, an important case involving habeas rights and the death penalty, for Dec. 8.
#SCOTUS also issues revised December argument calendar, adding Shinn v. Ramirez (moved to December from November to accommodate Texas cases) on Dec. 8: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/10-26-21-Amended-DEC-2021-Monthly-Argument-Session-Calendar.pdf
#SCOTUS issues order on divided argument in next week's Texas abortion cases, allows Texas to file one consolidated (but oversized) brief for both cases: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/102621zr_o7jp.pdf
Happening now outside SCOTUS: Several dozens supporters of expanding the size of the court are holding a rally. Speakers include Sen. Ed Markey, Sen. Tina Smith, and Rep. Mondaire Jones.
On Friday, the Supreme Court moved the Texas abortion litigation off the shadow docket and onto the "rocket docket." @maryrziegler explains how the expedited schedule is an important shift from how the court initially handled the issue in early September.
Supreme speed: The court puts abortion on the rocket docket - SCOTUSblog
Mary Ziegler is a law professor at Florida State University and the author of Abortion and the Law in America: ...
The court has adjusted its November argument schedule to reflect the accelerated consideration of the Texas abortion law.
#SCOTUS issues new oral argument calendar for November in light of today's orders scheduling Texas abortion cases for Nov. 1. Ramirez v. Collier, originally scheduled for Nov. 1, is now set for Nov. 9; Shinn v. Ramirez, originally set for Nov. 1, will be argued in December.
We've got two ways to catch up on what the Supreme Court did today on the Texas anti-abortion law.
For prose lovers, here's @AHoweBlogger's story: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/10/court-wont-block-texas-abortion-ban-but-fast-tracks-cases-for-argument-on-nov-1/
For the more video-inclined, here's @katieleebarlow's TikTok explainer: