|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1660||9th Cir.||Not Argued||Jan 7, 2019||n/a||Per Curiam||OT 2018|
Holding: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit failed to conduct the analysis required by Supreme Court precedents in determining whether two Escondido police officers were entitled to qualified immunity.
Judgment: Reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded in a per curiam opinion on January 7, 2019.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 08 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 12, 2018)|
|Jul 11 2018||Waiver of right of respondent Marty Emmons to respond filed.|
|Jul 18 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.|
|Jul 25 2018||Response Requested. (Due August 24, 2018)|
|Aug 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 24, 2018 to September 24, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 28 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 24, 2018.|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief of respondent Marty Emmons in opposition filed.|
|Oct 10 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.|
|Oct 29 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/2/2018.|
|Oct 31 2018||Record Requested.|
|Nov 02 2018||Record received from U.S.C.A. for the Ninth Circuit (one envelope). The remaining record is electronic and available on PACER.|
|Nov 05 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/9/2018.|
|Nov 13 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/16/2018.|
|Nov 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/30/2018.|
|Dec 03 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/7/2018.|
|Dec 20 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.|
|Jan 07 2019||The petition for certiorari is granted, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed in part and vacated in part, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion)|
|Feb 08 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
Senator Markey (D-Ma) is delivering remarks right now in front of the Supreme Court introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the court to 13 justices. He’s flanked by Chairman of House Judiciary, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Hank Johnson (D-Ga).
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here:
Cast your vote below!
The “great chief” and the “super chief”: A final showdown in Supreme Court March Madness - SCOTUSblog
Forget Ali vs. Frazier, Celtics vs. Lakers, or Evert vs. Navratilova. It’s time for Marshall vs. Warren. After...
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.