|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-8544||11th Cir.||Nov 28, 2016||Mar 6, 2017||7-0||Thomas||OT 2016|
Holding: The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, including Section 4B1.2(a)'s residual clause, are not subject to vagueness challenges under the due process clause.
Judgment: Affirmed, 7-0, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on March 6, 2017. Justice Kennedy filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor filed opinions concurring in the judgment. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 09 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 13, 2016)|
|Apr 07 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 13, 2016.|
|May 10 2016||Letter dated May 6, 2016, received from counsel for petitioner waiving the 14-day waiting period for the filing of a reply brief pursuant to Rule 15.5.|
|May 13 2016||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|May 18 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 2, 2016.|
|May 23 2016||Reply of petitioner Travis Beckles filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 06 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 9, 2016.|
|Jun 08 2016||Supplemental brief of petitioner Travis Beckles filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 13 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 16, 2016.|
|Jun 20 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 23, 2016.|
|Jun 27 2016||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.|
|Aug 11 2016||Adam K. Mortara, Esquire, of Chicago, Illinois, is invited to brief and argue this case, as amicus curiae, in support of the judgment below on Question 2 presented by the petition. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.|
|Aug 11 2016||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Aug 11 2016||Brief of petitioner Travis Beckles filed.|
|Aug 16 2016||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 19, 2016.|
|Aug 16 2016||The time to file the brief of Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment below on Question 2 presented by the petition is extended to and including October 21, 2016.|
|Aug 16 2016||Briefs of other amici curiae in support of the judgment below on Question 2 presented by the petition are to be filed on or before October 28, 2016.|
|Aug 18 2016||Brief amici curiae of Federal Public and Community Defenders, and the National Association of Federal Defenders filed.|
|Aug 18 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Scholars of Criminal Law, Federal Courts, and Sentencing filed.|
|Sep 19 2016||Brief of respondent United States filed.|
|Oct 20 2016||Motion for enlargement of time for oral argument and for divided argument filed by respondent United States.|
|Oct 21 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, November 28, 2016|
|Oct 21 2016||Brief of Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment below on Question 2 filed.|
|Oct 26 2016||CIRCULATED.|
|Nov 01 2016||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit.|
|Nov 14 2016||Motion for additional time to argue by respondent GRANTED. and the time is divided as follows: 25 minutes for petitioner, 25 minutes for respondent, and 15 minutes for the Court-appointed amicus curiae. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.|
|Nov 15 2016||Record received from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Florida 1 Envelope. Also received from the Southern District of Florida are SEALED documents, these records are electronic.|
|Nov 17 2016||Reply of petitioner Travis Beckles filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 21 2016||Reply of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 28 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Janice L. Bergmann, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. For respondent: Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For Court-appointed amicus curiae: Adam K. Mortara, Chicago, Ill. (Appointed by this Court.)|
|Mar 06 2017||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Breyer, and Alito, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion. Ginsburg, J., and Sotomayor, J., filed opinions concurring in the judgment. Kagan, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Apr 07 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 28 2017||Record from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Florida has been returned.|
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...