|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-1186||4th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether Medicaid recipients have a private right of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(23) to challenge a state’s determination that a specific provider is not qualified to provide certain medical services; and (2) what framework properly decides whether a statute creates a private right enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 03 2020||Application (19A752) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 27, 2020 to March 27, 2020, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Jan 08 2020||Application (19A752) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until March 27, 2020.|
|Mar 27 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 29, 2020)|
|Apr 14 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Joshua Baker|
|Apr 24 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 29, 2020 to May 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 24 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 29, 2020.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief amicus curiae of American Center for Law and Justice filed.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief amici curiae of Nebraska, Indiana, and 17 Other States filed.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief amici curiae of 137 Members of Congress filed.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief amici curiae of Family Policy Councils filed.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief amici curiae of 86 Current and 2 Former South Carolina Legislators filed.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Americans United for Life filed.|
|May 21 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 29, 2020 to June 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|May 22 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including June 29, 2020.|
|Jun 18 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 29, 2020 to July 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jun 19 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including July 29, 2020.|
|Jul 29 2020||Brief of respondents Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Aug 06 2020||Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from August 12, 2020 to September 16, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 07 2020||Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ certiorari until September 16, 2020, granted.|
|Sep 15 2020||Reply of petitioner Joshua Baker filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 16 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.|
|Sep 22 2020||Supplemental brief of respondents Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 08 2020||Supplemental brief of petitioner Joshua Baker submitted.|
|Oct 13 2020||Petition DENIED.|
BREAKING: The court rules in favor of a Catholic social services organization that sued Philadelphia after the city excluded it from a foster-care program due to the organization's refusal to certify same-sex couples as foster parents. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-123_g3bi.pdf
In second opinion of the day, SCOTUS sides with food giants Nestle and Cargill in a lawsuit brought by six citizens of Mali who say the companies facilitated human rights abuses by purchasing cocoa from plantations in Ivory Coast where they were enslaved as children.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court rejects the constitutional challenge to Obamacare in 7-2 opinion. The court tosses the lawsuit because the challengers do not have legal standing to sue. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-840_6jfm.pdf
With 18 cases outstanding, the Supreme Court will release opinions at 10:00 a.m. ET.
We’re waiting for decisions on the ACA, voting rights, LGBTQ+ rights/religious liberty, NCAA student-athlete compensation, and student speech.
Live blog starts at 9:45.
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, June 17 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, June 17, as the court releases one or more opinions in argued cases from...
Monday's decision rejecting sentence reductions for low-level crack-cocaine offenders may have been unanimous, but @ekownyankah writes that there is far more going on than the ruling's dry textual analysis might indicate. Read his incisive analysis here:
After decades, Congress reduced the racially unjust crack/cocaine disparity... raising amounts required for prison time. Why would Congress have left small time dealers to rot in prison for decades?
My thoughts on SCOTUS's ruling in Terry v. United States:https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/unanimous-ruling-on-crack-cocaine-disparity-is-heavy-on-text-light-on-history/
No more SCOTUS opinions for today. There are 18 cases still outstanding from the current term, including disputes over Obamacare, religious rights and voting rights. The next opinion day that we know of is Thursday.
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.