|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-369||9th Cir.||Mar 22, 2017||May 30, 2017||8-0||Alito||OT 2016|
Holding: The Fourth Amendment provides no basis for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's "provocation rule," which makes an officer's otherwise reasonable use of force unreasonable if (1) the officer "intentionally or recklessly provokes a violent confrontation" and (2) "the provocation is an independent Fourth Amendment violation."
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Alito on May 30, 2017. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 16 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 24, 2016)|
|Oct 24 2016||Brief of respondents Angel Mendez, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Nov 3 2016||Reply of petitioners Los Angeles County, California, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 7 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 22, 2016.|
|Nov 28 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 2, 2016.|
|Dec 2 2016||Petition GRANTED limited to Questions 1 and 3 presented by the petition.|
|Jan 13 2017||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the petitioners.|
|Jan 17 2017||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Jan 17 2017||Brief of petitioners Los Angeles County, California, et al. filed.|
|Jan 23 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Los Angeles County Police Chiefs' Association filed.|
|Jan 24 2017||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Counties, et al. filed.|
|Jan 24 2017||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jan 24 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Major County Sheriffs' Association filed.|
|Jan 24 2017||Brief amici curiae of California State Sheriffs' Association, et al. filed.|
|Jan 25 2017||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Feb 3 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, March 22, 2017|
|Feb 3 2017||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Feb 6 2017||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit. The record is electronic and available on PACER.|
|Feb 16 2017||Brief of respondents Angel Mendez, and Jennifer Lynn Garcia filed.|
|Feb 22 2017||CIRCULATED.|
|Feb 22 2017||Brief amicus curiae of The Georgetown University Law Center Chapter of the Black Law Students Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 23 2017||Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 23 2017||Brief amici curiae of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 23 2017||Brief amicus curiae of National Police Accountability Project filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 23 2017||Brief amici curiae The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Southern California filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 6 2017||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Mar 10 2017||Reply of petitioners County of Los Angeles, California, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 22 2017||Argued. For petitioners: E. Joshua Rosenkranz, New York, N. Y.; and Nicole A. Saharsky, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Leonard Feldman, Seattle, Wash.|
|May 30 2017||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Gorsuch, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.|
|Jul 3 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.