|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-1171||9th Cir.||Nov 13, 2019||Mar 23, 2020||9-0||Gorsuch||OT 2019|
Holding: A plaintiff who sues for racial discrimination in contracting under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 bears the burden of showing that race was a but-for cause of the plaintiff’s injury, and that burden remains constant over the life of the lawsuit.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch on March 23, 2020. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 08 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 10, 2019)|
|Apr 10 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed. VIDED.|
|Apr 10 2019||Brief of respondents National Association of African American-Owned Media, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Apr 29 2019||Reply of petitioner Comcast Corporation filed.|
|Apr 30 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2019.|
|May 15 2019||Rescheduled.|
|May 20 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.|
|May 28 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2019.|
|Jun 03 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/6/2019.|
|Jun 10 2019||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Jun 18 2019||Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jun 26 2019||Joint motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 8, 2019. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 23, 2019.|
|Jul 08 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 13, 2019.|
|Aug 05 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, National Association of African American-Owned Media, et al.|
|Aug 06 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Comcast Corporation.|
|Aug 08 2019||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Aug 08 2019||Brief of petitioner Comcast Corporation filed.|
|Aug 15 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Workplace Compliance filed.|
|Aug 15 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Aug 15 2019||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Aug 15 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Sep 03 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 16 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Sep 17 2019||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Sep 17 2019||Record received from the U.S.D.C. Central District of California is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Sep 17 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Issues4Life Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 23 2019||Brief of respondents National Association of African American-Owned Media, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 26 2019||Brief amici curiae of Law & History Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 27 2019||Brief amici curiae of Torts Scholars filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 27 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 30 2019||Brief amici curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 30 2019||Brief amici curiae of Members of Congress filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 30 2019||Brief amici curiae of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 30 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Professor W. Burlette Carter filed. (Distributed).|
|Sep 30 2019||Brief amici curiae of Employment Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 15 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 23 2019||Reply of petitioner Comcast Corporation filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 13 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Miguel Estrada, Washington, D. C.; and Morgan L. Ratner, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Erwin Chemerinsky, Berkeley, Cal.|
|Mar 23 2020||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Gorsuch, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined, and in which Ginsburg, J., joined except for the footnote. Ginsburg, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.|
|Apr 24 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...
I really enjoyed getting to chat with the incomparable @AHoweBlogger about (1) why #SCOTUS's "shadow docket" *is* a big deal; (2) why it's so hard to figure out how to include it in broader assessments of the Justices' work; and (3) some possible ways to include it going forward. https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1417545384314949635
How do you solve a problem like the shadow docket? @steve_vladeck has some thoughts and shared them with @AHoweBlogger in the latest SCOTUStalk.
The Supreme Court has rescinded its COVID-related orders related to filing, but no word on resuming in-person oral arguments in October.
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.