|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-197||2nd Cir.||TBD||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2021|
Issue: Whether the First Amendment deprives a government official of his right to control his personal Twitter account by blocking third-party accounts if he uses that personal account in part to announce official actions and policies.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 20 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 21, 2020)|
|Sep 21 2020||Brief of respondents Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Oct 06 2020||Reply of petitioners Trump, Donald J., President for the United States, et al. filed.|
|Oct 07 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/30/2020.|
|Oct 28 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 02 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/6/2020.|
|Nov 04 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 09 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/13/2020.|
|Nov 10 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 16 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/20/2020.|
|Nov 18 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 30 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.|
|Dec 07 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.|
|Jan 04 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.|
|Jan 11 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/15/2021.|
|Jan 19 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.|
|Jan 19 2021||Supplemental brief of petitioners Trump, Donald J., President for the United States, et al. filed.|
|Jan 21 2021||Supplemental brief of respondents Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, et al. filed.|
|Feb 12 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.|
|Feb 22 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/26/2021.|
|Mar 01 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/5/2021.|
|Mar 15 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/19/2021.|
|Mar 22 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/26/2021.|
|Mar 29 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2021.|
|Apr 05 2021||Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED with instructions to dismiss the case as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950). Justice Thomas, concurring. (Detached Opinion)|
|May 07 2021||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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...
I really enjoyed getting to chat with the incomparable @AHoweBlogger about (1) why #SCOTUS's "shadow docket" *is* a big deal; (2) why it's so hard to figure out how to include it in broader assessments of the Justices' work; and (3) some possible ways to include it going forward. https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1417545384314949635
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.