|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-186||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2012|
Issue: Whether the Ninth Circuit violated the Constitution, created circuit splits, contravened this Court’s decisions, and subverted the appellate process by replacing the question presented by the parties with an issue that the prosecution deliberately abandoned, and by making a factual finding (i.e. that reasonable suspicion existed) for the first time on appeal that disregarded the factual findings of the district court and agents at the scene, and then by holding that a citizen’s personal belongings may be seized at the border with no suspicion of wrongdoing.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 23 2013||Application (12A1133) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 6, 2013 to August 5, 2013, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Jun 4 2013||Application (12A1133) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until July 6, 2013.|
|Jun 12 2013||Application (12A1133) to extend further the time from July 6, 2013 to August 5, 2013, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Jun 20 2013||Application (12A1133) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until August 5, 2013.|
|Aug 5 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 9, 2013)|
|Aug 15 2013||Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.|
|Aug 21 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 30, 2013.|
|Sep 9 2013||Response Requested . (Due October 9, 2013)|
|Sep 9 2013||Brief amici curiae of U.S. Border Control Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Oct 4 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 8, 2013.|
|Oct 31 2013||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including November 29, 2013.|
|Nov 29 2013||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Dec 10 2013||Reply of petitioner Howard Wesley Cotterman filed.|
|Dec 18 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 10, 2014.|
|Jan 13 2014||Petition DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
|Feb 5 2014||Petition for Rehearing filed.|
|Feb 12 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 28, 2014.|
|Mar 3 2014||Rehearing DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
The next #SCOTUS grants? Kevin McCarthy v. Nancy Pelosi in a fight over congressional proxy voting; the First Amendment-based ministerial exception to employment law returns; nondelegation doctrine (!); and the constitutionality of the FTC's structure.
Revenge of the rescheduled cases: Congressional proxy voting, the ministerial exception, and more - SCOTUSblog
The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming con...
JUST IN: The Supreme Court, over dissents from the three liberal justices, rejects a request from Texas abortion clinics to immediately return the litigation over Texas' six-week abortion law to a federal district court.
The Supreme Court issues a single opinion today, ruling in an 8-1 vote that a criminal defendant's rights were violated under the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause when the government introduced a plea allocution from another proceeding. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-637_10n2.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: We expect one or more opinions in argued cases to be issued starting at 10 a.m. EST. At 9:45, we'll fire up our live blog, where we'll also chat about this week's arguments and last night's ruling on Trump records. Grab your ☕️ & join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, Jan. 20 - SCOTUSblog
On Thursday, January 20, we will be live blogging as the court releases opinions in one or more argued cases f...
Tonight's ruling on the Trump Jan. 6 documents, explained.
BREAKING: Trump loses his bid at SCOTUS to block Congress from obtaining his White House records related to 1/6/21. Clarence Thomas is the lone public dissenter in the apparent 8-1 ruling.
#SCOTUS rejects request from former President Donald Trump to block the release of documents to committee investigating Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Here's the link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a272_9p6b.pdf