|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-6431||5th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2019|
Issue: Whether factual error is categorically immune from plain-error review.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 23 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 29, 2019)|
|Nov 19 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 29, 2019 to December 30, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 21 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 30, 2019.|
|Nov 29 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 30, 2019 to January 15, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 29 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 15, 2020.|
|Jan 15 2020||Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed. VIDED.|
|Jan 30 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.|
|Feb 24 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2020.|
|Mar 02 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.|
|Mar 16 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2020.|
|Mar 23 2020||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of Davis v. United States, 589 U. S. ___ (2020) (per curiam).|
|Apr 24 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In clash between private property rights and pro-union interests, the Supreme Court invalidates a California regulation that requires agricultural employers to allow union organizers onto their property to speak with workers. SCOTUS says the regulation violates the 5th Amendment.
BREAKING: In major First Amendment case on student speech, the Supreme Court rules 8-1 in favor of a former high school student who was disciplined by her public school after sending a vulgar message on Snapchat complaining about the school's cheerleading squad.
In the second Supreme Court opinion of the day, the court holds that the structure of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (which regulates Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac) is unconstitutional because of the limits on the president's ability to remove the agency's director.
The Supreme Court issues its opinion in the "hot pursuit" case -- a case about when police can follow a fleeing suspect into a home without a warrant. In an opinion by Kagan, the court declines to adopt a bright-line rule on "hot pursuits" of people suspected of misdemeanors.
The Supreme Court will release one or more opinions at 10:00 a.m. Join us on the live blog beginning at 9:45. https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/announcement-of-opinions-for-wednesday-june-23/
After the Supreme Court handed down three opinions this morning, 12 cases remain outstanding for this term. They include voting rights, student free speech, and anonymous donors. We expect more opinions on Wednesday, June 23 at 10:00 a.m. ET.
We will open the live blog at 9:45.
Experts continue to analyze last week's Fulton decision. Here are the final pieces in our symposium.
Thomas Berg & Douglas Laycock on the future of free-exercise challenges: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/protecting-free-exercise-under-smith-and-after-smith/
Holly Hollman on the ruling's many unresolved questions: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/court-requires-religious-exemption-but-leaves-many-questions-unanswered/
The first two pieces in our symposium on yesterday's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia are up. First, @JimOleske dissects the decision in light of the court's shadow-docket ruling in Tandon v. Newsom, which took a very different approach to free exercise.