|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-333||D. Md.||Mar 28, 2018||Jun 18, 2018||N/A||Per Curiam||OT 2017|
Holding: Because the balance of equities and the public interest tilt against the preliminary injunction motion of plaintiffs claiming that a Maryland congressional district was gerrymandered to retaliate against them for their political views, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.
Judgment: Affirmed in a per curiam opinion on June 18, 2018.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 01 2017||Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due October 2, 2017)|
|Sep 01 2017||Motion to expedite consideration of the jurisdictional statement filed by appellants.|
|Sep 11 2017||Response in opposition to motion to expedite consideration of the jurisdictional statement from appellees filed.|
|Sep 12 2017||Reply to response in opposition to motion to expedite consideration of the jurisdictional statement from appellants filed.|
|Sep 13 2017||Motion to expedite consideration filed by appellants DENIED.|
|Sep 14 2017||Order extending time to file response to the jurisdictional statement to and including October 31, 2017.|
|Oct 31 2017||Motion to affirm filed by appellees Linda H. Lamone, et al.|
|Nov 13 2017||Opposition to motion of appellants O. John Benisek, et al. filed.|
|Nov 14 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2017.|
|Dec 04 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2017.|
|Dec 08 2017||Further consideration of the question of jurisdiction is POSTPONED to the hearing of the case on the merits.|
|Dec 26 2017||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, O. John Benisek, et al.|
|Jan 05 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Linda H. Lamone, et al.|
|Jan 22 2018||Brief of appellants O. John Benisek, et al. filed.|
|Jan 22 2018||Joint appendix filed (4 volumes). (Statement of cost filed.)|
|Jan 24 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, March 28, 2018|
|Jan 25 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Common Cause filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of Bipartisan Current and Former Members of Congress filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, International City/County Management Association, and the County of Santa Clara filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Michael Kang filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of Campaign Legal Center and Southern Coalition for Social Justice in Support of Neither Party filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of Judicial Watch, Inc. and Allied Educational Foundation in support of neither party filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Brennan Center for Justice at N.Y.U. School of Law filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al. in support of neither party filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of Governors Lawrence Joseph Hogan Jr., Arnold A. Schwarzenegger, Joseph Graham "Gray" Davis Jr., and John R. Kasich filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union, et al. filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Stephen M. Shapiro filed.|
|Feb 07 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Feb 21 2018||Record requested from the U.S.D.C Dist. of Maryland.|
|Feb 21 2018||Brief of appellees Linda H. Lamone, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 27 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Senator Joseph B. Scarnati, III filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of State of Wisconsin filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of States of Michigan, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 13 2018||Reply of appellants O. John Benisek, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2018||Argued. For appellants: Michael B. Kimberly, Washington, D. C. For appellees: Steven M. Sullivan, Solicitor General, Baltimore, Md.|
|Jun 18 2018||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Opinion per curiam.|
|Jul 20 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
NEW: The Supreme Court declines to block the execution of Alabama prisoner Willie Smith, who is scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection tonight. No noted dissents, but Sotomayor adds a brief statement expressing concerns about Alabama's conduct.
NEW: Texas files its response to the Justice Department's emergency application asking the Supreme Court to block the state's six-week abortion ban.
Full brief is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21A85/197064/20211021113524436_21A85_United%20States%20v.%20Texas_Opposition.pdf
Breyer is the third justice since August to turn away an emergency challenge to a vaccine mandate, without referring the issue to the full court. Earlier: Barrett declined to block Indiana University's mandate, and Sotomayor declined to block NYC's mandate for school employees.
Justice Stephen Breyer turns down request to block enforcement of Maine's COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers, although he leaves open possibility that plaintiffs can return to #SCOTUS after the court of appeals acts: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21a83.html
Where do things stand at the Supreme Court with the two pending challenges to the Texas anti-abortion law? Here's an explainer from @katieleebarlow in a Tik Tok minute.
#SCOTUS grants request by Texas abortion providers to fast-track consideration of petition for cert before judgment in challenge to SB8. Response from Texas is due by noon on Thursday -- same time as Texas's response to US filing today. Order is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/101821zr1_2c8f.pdf
BREAKING: The Justice Department has filed its emergency application asking the Supreme Court to block Texas' six-week abortion ban.
The filing is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21A85/196650/20211018120230336_US%20v.%20Texas%20application%20final.pdf
NEW: The Justice Department, as expected, says it plans to ask the Supreme Court to block enforcement of the Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.