|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-483||7th Cir.||Not Argued||May 28, 2019||n/a||Per Curiam||OT 2018|
Holding: Indiana’s law relating to the disposition of fetal remains by abortion providers passes rational basis review; certiorari is denied on the question whether the state may bar the knowing provision of sex-, race- or disability-selective abortions by abortion providers, as only the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit has addressed this kind of law.
Judgment: Reversed in a per curiam opinion on May 28, 2019. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justice Sotomayor would deny the petition for a writ of certiorari.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 14 2018||Application (18A284) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 23, 2018 to October 22, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Sep 19 2018||Application (18A284) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until October 22, 2018.|
|Oct 12 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 15, 2018)|
|Oct 23 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 15, 2018 to December 5, 2018, submitted to The Clerk. filed.|
|Oct 25 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 5, 2018.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of Alliance Defending Freedom and the Radiance Foundation filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of American Center for Law & Justice, et al. filed. (11/20/208)|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of Americans United for Life, et al. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of Fondation Jerome Lejeune, Saving Down Syndrome, and Down Pride filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Educational and Legal Defense Fund, Inc. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of The Restoration Project, et al. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Susan B. Anthony List filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of Pro-Life Legal Defense Fund, et al. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Beverly McMillan, M.D. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of State of Wisconsin, et al. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amicus curiae of CatholicVote.org Education Fund filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Amicus brief of Prolife Center at the University of St. Thomas not accepted for filing. (November 20, 2018)(Corrected version submitted)|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, et al. filed.|
|Nov 19 2018||Amicus brief of American Center for Law & Justice and Parents of Disabled Children not accepted for filing. (November 20, 2018)(Corrected version submitted)|
|Nov 19 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Prolife Center at the University of St. Thomas filed.|
|Dec 04 2018||Brief of respondents Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 18 2018||Reply of petitioners Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health, et al. filed.|
|Dec 19 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.|
|Jan 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.|
|Jan 14 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/18/2019.|
|Feb 04 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.|
|Feb 19 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.|
|Feb 25 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.|
|Mar 11 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.|
|Mar 18 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2019.|
|Mar 25 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/29/2019.|
|Mar 28 2019||Letter of March 15, 2019 from counsel for amicus curiae Wisconsin received. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2019||Letter of March 27, 2019 from counsel for amicus curiae West Virginia received. (Distributed)|
|Apr 08 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.|
|Apr 15 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/18/2019.|
|Apr 22 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.|
|May 06 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.|
|May 13 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2019.|
|May 20 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.|
|May 28 2019||Petition GRANTED and Judgment REVERSED as to Question 1 presented by the petition. Petition DENIED as to Question 2 presented by the petition. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion). Justice Sotomayor would deny the petition for a writ of certiorari as to both questions presented. Justice Thomas, concurring. (Detached Opinion). Justice Ginsburg, concurring in part and dissenting in part. (Detached Opinion).|
|Jul 01 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
NEW: The Supreme Court rules against the FTC in a dispute with a payday loan company over the extent of the FTC's authority to seek monetary restitution from companies engaged in deceptive practices. SCOTUS says 9-0 that FTC doesn't have that authority under the statute at issue.
NEW: The Supreme Court sides against the federal government and in favor of people who brought Social Security claims in a technical ruling about "exhaustion" rules (essentially, when in the bureaucratic process the claimants were required to raise certain legal arguments).
BREAKING: In 6-3 decision, SCOTUS declines to further limit the ability of states to sentence juveniles to life without parole. The court upholds the sentence of a Mississippi man who killed his grandfather when he was 15; says sentencing procedure did not violate 8th Amendment.
Supreme Court opinions in 15 minutes!
We’re LIVE right now discussing which opinions we could see today and answering your questions. Join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, April 22 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, April 22, as the court releases one or more opinions in argued cases. Th...
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
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.