Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
17-1184 | 6th Cir. | Dec 4, 2018 | Apr 1, 2019 | 6-3 | Kagan | OT 2018 |
Holding: A vocational expert’s refusal to provide private market-survey data during a Social Security disability benefits hearing upon the applicant’s request does not categorically preclude the testimony from counting as “substantial evidence” in federal court under 42 U. S. C. §405(g).
Judgment: Affirmed, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on April 1, 2019. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined.
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
Feb 21 2018 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 26, 2018) |
Feb 21 2018 | Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court’s Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system. |
Mar 20 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 26, 2018 to April 25, 2018, submitted to The Clerk. |
Mar 21 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 25, 2018. |
Apr 20 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 25, 2018 to May 14, 2018, submitted to The Clerk. |
Apr 20 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 14, 2018. |
May 14 2018 | Brief of respondent Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration in opposition filed. |
May 21 2018 | Reply of petitioner Michael J. Biestek filed. |
May 22 2018 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/7/2018. |
Jun 11 2018 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018. |
Jun 18 2018 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/21/2018. |
Jun 25 2018 | Petition GRANTED. |
Jun 25 2018 | As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions. |
Jul 13 2018 | Joint motion for an extension of time to file the opening briefs on the merits filed. |
Jul 13 2018 | Joint motion to extend the time to file the opening briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 27, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 15, 2018. |
Aug 03 2018 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Michael J. Biestek |
Aug 03 2018 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Michael J. Biestek. |
Aug 27 2018 | Brief of petitioner Michael J. Biestek filed. |
Sep 04 2018 | Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Disability Representatives filed. |
Sep 04 2018 | Brief amici curiae of National Organization of Social Security Claimants' Representatives, et al. filed. |
Oct 01 2018 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED. |
Oct 09 2018 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, December 4, 2018 |
Oct 15 2018 | Record received from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit. |
Oct 15 2018 | Brief of Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration not accepted for filing. (Revised brief submitted - 10/16/18) |
Oct 15 2018 | Brief of respondent Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration filed. (10/16/18) |
Oct 19 2018 | CIRCULATED |
Nov 14 2018 | Reply of petitioner Michael J. Biestek filed. (Distributed) |
Dec 04 2018 | Argued. For petitioner: Ishan Bhabha, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. |
Apr 01 2019 | Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Breyer, Alito, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. |
May 03 2019 | JUDGMENT ISSUED. |
The Supreme Court got rid of several cases this morning -- in one fell swoop. Read @AHoweBlogger's latest coverage of the emoluments cases, spiritual advisers at Texas executions, Texas abortion policies, COVID restrictions, and NY political corruption.
Justices vacate rulings on Trump and emoluments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday morning released orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. 22. The justices once again did not ac...
www.scotusblog.com
In this morning's orders list, SCOTUS took no action on pending cert petitions involving:
- Mississippi's near-ban on abortions after 15 weeks,
- a Trump rule banning Title X clinics from providing abortion referrals,
- the Trump administration's "public charge" immigration rule.
No real opinions today. The Supreme Court dismissed cert as "improvidently granted" in Henry Schein Inc. v. Archer and White Sales Inc.—a case about arbitration agreements.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-963_2c8f.pdf
That's all for today, folks.
The Supreme Court does not add any cases to its docket. It sends the Trump emoluments case back to the lower court with instructions to dismiss as moot.
Here is the orders list. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/012521zor_3f14.pdf
Here is the orders list. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/012521zor_3f14.pdf
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.