Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15-58 | 9th Cir. | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | OT 2015 |
Issue: (1) Whether the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness standard requires that a suspect threaten a police officer with a weapon before the police officer can use deadly force to apprehend the suspect, or whether Tennessee v. Garner allows a police officer to use deadly force to prevent the suspect‘s escape if based on the totality of the circumstances, the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or others and where when feasible some warning has been given; (2) whether Tennessee v. Garner defeats a police officer’s entitlement to qualified immunity by providing fair and clear warning that it is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment for a police officer to use deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect where the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect has just committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, if after the shooting it is discovered the suspect was unarmed.
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
Jul 10 2015 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 13, 2015) |
Aug 3 2015 | Waiver of right of respondent Robert Contreras to respond filed. |
Aug 12 2015 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 28, 2015. |
Aug 13 2015 | Response Requested . (Due September 14, 2015) |
Sep 1 2015 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including October 14, 2015. |
Oct 14 2015 | Brief of respondent Robert Contreras in opposition filed. |
Oct 23 2015 | Reply of petitioners City of Los Angeles, California, et al. filed. |
Oct 28 2015 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 13, 2015. |
Nov 12 2015 | Rescheduled. |
Nov 16 2015 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 24, 2015. |
Nov 20 2015 | Rescheduled. |
Nov 30 2015 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 4, 2015. |
Dec 7 2015 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 11, 2015. |
Dec 14 2015 | Petition DENIED. |
At 10:00 a.m. EST, SCOTUS will hear argument on whether, when police are pursuing someone for a misdemeanor, that is always an “exigent circumstance” that will allow the officer to follow the suspect into a house without a warrant. More from @AHoweBlogger
Justices to consider whether “hot pursuit” justifies entering the home without a warrant - SCOTUSblog
An old English maxim instructs that a man’s home is his castle – a refuge from the outside world. On W...
www.scotusblog.com
At 10:00 a.m. EST, the court will hear argument on whether a federal appellate court can consider an asylum seeker’s testimony as credible in its own review when immigration courts fail to make an explicit credibility determination. More from Eunice Lee:
Court to assess when to treat asylum seekers’ testimony as credible - SCOTUSblog
In asylum cases before the immigration and federal courts, responsibility for making credibility determinations rests wi...
www.scotusblog.com
Here’s the story from @jamesromoser on the Biden administration’s latest effort to reduce the Supreme Court’s already whittled-down docket. https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/federal-government-asks-court-to-scrap-challenge-to-medicaid-work-requirements/
New: The federal gov't wants SCOTUS to nix the upcoming case on Trump-era Medicaid work-requirement approvals (currently scheduled for oral argument on 3/29). The Biden administration -- in the process of rescinding the policy -- tells SCOTUS it no longer needs to hear the case.
New: The federal gov't wants SCOTUS to nix the upcoming case on Trump-era Medicaid work-requirement approvals (currently scheduled for oral argument on 3/29). The Biden administration -- in the process of rescinding the policy -- tells SCOTUS it no longer needs to hear the case.
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.