|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.|
A majority of the Supreme Court seems inclined to uphold Mississippi's 15-week abortion law, but the six conservative justices appear divided about whether to entirely overrule Roe v. Wade. @AHoweBlogger's first take from this morning's argument:
Majority of court appears poised to uphold Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks - SCOTUSblog
It has been nearly 30 years since the Supreme Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirme...
Starting momentarily: Oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case involving Mississippi’s attempt to ban nearly all abortions after 15 weeks. The state has asked the court to overturn Roe v. Wade. We’ll be live-tweeting the argument here in this thread.
Twenty minutes before the start of oral argument, here’s the scene outside the Supreme Court.
Photos by @katieleebarlow.
TODAY AT SCOTUS: The case that could determine the future of abortion in America. Oral argument begins at 10 a.m. EST. We'll be live-tweeting the full argument. You can also listen live here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx.
Here's our preview from @AHoweBlogger: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/11/roe-v-wade-hangs-in-balance-as-reshaped-court-prepares-to-hear-biggest-abortion-case-in-decades/
Our cross-platform coverage of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization includes, of course, TikTok. Follow us there if you don't already! And tune in for @katieleebarlow's live dispatch from outside the court tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. EST.
SCOTUS was inundated with "friend of the court" briefs -- more than 140 of them -- in the abortion case being heard tomorrow. We reviewed them all. Here's a guide to the many arguments being pushed by academics, politicians, & interest groups in the case.
We read all the amicus briefs in Dobbs so you don’t have to - SCOTUSblog
More than 140 amicus briefs were filed in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the potentially momentou...