|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-424||D.C. Cir.||Oct 4, 2017||Feb 21, 2018||6-3||Breyer||OT 2017|
Holding: A guilty plea, by itself, does not bar a federal criminal defendant from challenging the constitutionality of the statute of conviction on direct appeal.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on February 21, 2018. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Kennedy and Thomas joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 30 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 31, 2016)|
|Oct 27 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 30, 2016.|
|Nov 16 2016||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including December 20, 2016.|
|Dec 20 2016||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Jan 03 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 19, 2017.|
|Jan 03 2017||Reply of petitioner Rodney Class filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 06 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 17, 2017.|
|Feb 21 2017||Petition GRANTED.|
|Mar 15 2017||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including May 12, 2017.|
|Mar 15 2017||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 17, 2017.|
|May 12 2017||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received.)|
|May 12 2017||Brief of petitioner Rodney Class filed.|
|May 12 2017||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party from counsel for the petitioner.|
|May 19 2017||Brief amici curiae of The National Association of Criminal Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|May 19 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Albert W. Alschuler filed.|
|May 19 2017||Brief amicus curiae of The Innocence Project filed.|
|Jul 17 2017||Brief of respondent United States filed.|
|Jul 19 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, October 4, 2017.|
|Aug 01 2017||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. District of Columbia Circuit.|
|Aug 09 2017||CIRCULATED|
|Aug 16 2017||Reply of petitioner Rodney Class filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 04 2017||Argued. For petitioner: Jessica R. Amunson, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Eric J. Feigin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Feb 21 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kennedy and Thomas, JJ., joined.|
|Mar 26 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.