|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.|
Supreme Court opinions in 15 minutes!
We’re LIVE right now discussing which opinions we could see today and answering your questions. Join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, April 22 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, April 22, as the court releases one or more opinions in argued cases. Th...
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
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!
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.