|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-10400||4th Cir.||Not Argued||Jan 9, 2015||N/A||N/A||OT 2014|
Holding: Dismissed after petitioner neither filed a brief on the merits within forty-five days of the order granting review, requested an extension of time, nor responded to correspondence sent to him.
Judgment: Dismissed. on January 9, 2015.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 17 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 7, 2014)|
|Jul 24 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 29, 2014.|
|Aug 19 2014||Response Requested . (Due September 18, 2014)|
|Sep 23 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including September 26, 2014, for all respondents.|
|Sep 26 2014||Brief of respondent Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Maryland, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Oct 16 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 31, 2014.|
|Nov 3 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 7, 2014.|
|Nov 7 2014||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED limited to the following question: Whether, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), a district court has discretion to extend the time for service of process absent a showing of good cause, as the Second, Third, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have held, or whether the district court lacks such discretion, as the Fourth Circuit has held?.|
|Jan 9 2015||Petitioner has not filed a brief on the merits within 45 days of the order granting the writ of certiorari, as required by Rule 25.1. Petitioner has neither requested an extension of time nor responded to correspondence directed to the mailing address provided under Rule 34.1(f). Additional efforts to contact petitioner have been unsuccessful. The writ of certiorari is accordingly dismissed.|
|Feb 3 2015||Petition for Rehearing filed.|
|Feb 4 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 20, 2015.|
|Feb 23 2015||Rehearing DENIED.|
|Feb 23 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Wait wut.. RBG ghost-wrote the equal protection bits of Obergefell?!
And I learned this on @SCOTUSblog’s TikTok?! https://www.tiktok.com/@scotusblog/video/6922179577724931333
"This is not our first commission rodeo” says Levy. 😉
Love this write up of the @BrookingsInst's panel yesterday with @Susan_Hennessey, @danepps,@cdkang76, and @mollyereynolds.
Thanks, @SCOTUSblog and Kalvis Golde!
Spilling SCOTUS tea on TikTok today. Well, actually, @eskridgebill spilled the tea, we just tok’d about it. 🍵
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...
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.