|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Issues: (1) Whether a petitioner’s conviction for involuntary manslaughter, based on words alone, violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment when the petitioner’s communications, which were found to have caused the deceased’s suicide, did not constitute speech that was “an integral part of conduct in violation of a valid criminal statute,” Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.; and (2) whether the petitioner’s conviction violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment because in assisted- or encouraged-suicide cases the common law of involuntary manslaughter fails to provide reasonably clear guidelines to prevent “arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement,” McDonnell v. United States.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 24 2019||Application (18A1112) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 7, 2019 to July 6, 2019, submitted to Justice Breyer.|
|Apr 29 2019||Application (18A1112) granted by Justice Breyer extending the time to file until July 8, 2019.|
|Jul 08 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 12, 2019)|
|Aug 09 2019||Waiver of right of respondent Commonwealth of Massachusetts to respond filed.|
|Aug 14 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.|
|Aug 22 2019||Response Requested. (Due September 23, 2019)|
|Sep 12 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 23, 2019 to November 22, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Sep 17 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 22, 2019.|
|Nov 22 2019||Brief of respondent Commonwealth of Massachusetts in opposition filed.|
|Dec 09 2019||Reply of petitioner Michelle Carter filed.|
|Dec 11 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.|
|Jan 13 2020||Petition DENIED.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
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...
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.