|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-1287||6th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2019|
Issues: (1) Whether binding authority holding that a police officer violates the Fourth Amendment when he uses a police dog to apprehend a suspect who has surrendered by lying down on the ground “clearly establish[es]” that it is likewise unconstitutional to use a police dog on a suspect who has surrendered by sitting on the ground with his hands up; and (2) whether the judge-made doctrine of qualified immunity, which cannot be justified by reference to the text of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or the relevant common law background, and which has been shown not to serve its intended policy goals, should be narrowed or abolished.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 17 2019||Application (18A756) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 6, 2019 to April 7, 2019, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.|
|Jan 28 2019||Application (18A756) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until April 8, 2019.|
|Apr 08 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 10, 2019)|
|Apr 17 2019||Waiver of right of respondents Brad Bracey, et al. to respond filed.|
|Apr 23 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.|
|May 01 2019||Response Requested. (Due May 31, 2019)|
|May 23 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 31, 2019 to July 1, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|May 30 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.|
|May 31 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 1, 2019.|
|May 31 2019||Brief amici curiae of Legal Scholars filed.|
|May 31 2019||Brief amici curiae of Cross-Ideological Groups Dedicated to Ensuring Official Accountability, Restoring the Public's Trust in Law Enforcement, and Promoting the Rule of Law filed.|
|Jun 25 2019||Brief of respondents Brad Bracey, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jul 09 2019||Reply of petitioner Alexander L. Baxter filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 10 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.|
|Sep 23 2019||Rescheduled.|
|Oct 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.|
|Oct 08 2019||Rescheduled.|
|Oct 15 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/18/2019.|
|Oct 15 2019||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 26 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/13/2019.|
|Dec 11 2019||Rescheduled.|
|Jan 06 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.|
|Jan 08 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Apr 28 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2020.|
|May 13 2020||Rescheduled.|
|May 18 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/21/2020.|
|May 22 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/28/2020.|
|Jun 01 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.|
|Jun 08 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/11/2020.|
|Jun 15 2020||Petition DENIED. Justice Thomas, dissenting from the denial of certiorari. (Detached Opinion)|
NEW: The Supreme Court rules against the FTC in a dispute with a payday loan company over the extent of the FTC's authority to seek monetary restitution from companies engaged in deceptive practices. SCOTUS says 9-0 that FTC doesn't have that authority under the statute at issue.
NEW: The Supreme Court sides against the federal government and in favor of people who brought Social Security claims in a technical ruling about "exhaustion" rules (essentially, when in the bureaucratic process the claimants were required to raise certain legal arguments).
BREAKING: In 6-3 decision, SCOTUS declines to further limit the ability of states to sentence juveniles to life without parole. The court upholds the sentence of a Mississippi man who killed his grandfather when he was 15; says sentencing procedure did not violate 8th Amendment.
Supreme Court opinions in 15 minutes!
We’re LIVE right now discussing which opinions we could see today and answering your questions. Join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, April 22 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, April 22, as the court releases one or more opinions in argued cases. Th...
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
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.