|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1180||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2017|
Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit erred in creating an immigration-specific rule under which state police power regulations that “arrang[e]” federal immigration classifications are pre-empted, even if pre-emption was not “the clear and manifest purpose of Congress”; and (2) whether the 9th Circuit erred in assuming that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, an executive-branch policy of non-enforcement, was valid “federal law” capable of pre-empting a state police power regulation. CVSG: 02/14/2018.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 29 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 1, 2017)|
|Apr 14 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 22, 2017.|
|May 01 2017||Brief amici curiae of The States of Texas, et al. filed.|
|May 01 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Immigration Reform Law Institute filed.|
|May 01 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Governor Jeb Bush filed.|
|May 01 2017||Brief amici curiae of United States Justice Foundation, et al. filed.|
|May 22 2017||Brief of respondents Arizona Dream Act Coalition, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jun 01 2017||Reply of petitioners Janice K. Brewer, former Governor of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Jun 06 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 22, 2017.|
|Jun 26 2017||The Acting Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|Jan 24 2018||Letter of January 22, 2018, received from counsel for the petitioners.|
|Feb 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States of America filed.|
|Feb 26 2018||Supplemental brief of petitioners Janice K. Brewer, former Governor of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Feb 28 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/16/2018.|
|Mar 19 2018||Petition DENIED.|
#SCOTUS issues order on divided argument in next week's Texas abortion cases, allows Texas to file one consolidated (but oversized) brief for both cases: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/102621zr_o7jp.pdf
Happening now outside SCOTUS: Several dozens supporters of expanding the size of the court are holding a rally. Speakers include Sen. Ed Markey, Sen. Tina Smith, and Rep. Mondaire Jones.
On Friday, the Supreme Court moved the Texas abortion litigation off the shadow docket and onto the "rocket docket." @maryrziegler explains how the expedited schedule is an important shift from how the court initially handled the issue in early September.
Supreme speed: The court puts abortion on the rocket docket - SCOTUSblog
Mary Ziegler is a law professor at Florida State University and the author of Abortion and the Law in America: ...
The court has adjusted its November argument schedule to reflect the accelerated consideration of the Texas abortion law.
#SCOTUS issues new oral argument calendar for November in light of today's orders scheduling Texas abortion cases for Nov. 1. Ramirez v. Collier, originally scheduled for Nov. 1, is now set for Nov. 9; Shinn v. Ramirez, originally set for Nov. 1, will be argued in December.
We've got two ways to catch up on what the Supreme Court did today on the Texas anti-abortion law.
For prose lovers, here's @AHoweBlogger's story: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/10/court-wont-block-texas-abortion-ban-but-fast-tracks-cases-for-argument-on-nov-1/
For the more video-inclined, here's @katieleebarlow's TikTok explainer:
When it hears argument on Nov. 1, the court will not directly consider the substance of the Texas abortion law. Here are the questions presented. The first concerns Texas' unusual private-enforcement scheme; the second concerns whether DOJ has the right to sue to block the law.
BREAKING: SCOTUS fast-tracks both lawsuits challenging the Texas anti-abortion law and schedules oral argument just 10 days from now. Sotomayor writes a partial dissent castigating the court for once again leaving the law in place in the meantime.