|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-976||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2017|
Issues: (1) Whether–when the Supreme Court held in Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio that an exception allowing for less rigorous review applies when the government seeks to combat misleading commercial speech by requiring (as an alternative to restricting speech) the disclosure of “purely factual and uncontroversial information” that is not “unduly burdensome” and is “reasonably related to the state’s interest in preventing deception of consumers”–this reduced standard of scrutiny of compelled commercial speech applies beyond the need to prevent consumer deception; and (2) whether, when the Zauderer standard applies, it is sufficient that the compelled speech be: factually accurate, even if controversial and, when read as a whole, potentially misleading; and merely reasonably related to any non-“trivial” governmental interest.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 09 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 8, 2018)|
|Jan 17 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, CTIA - The Wireless Association.|
|Jan 18 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, City of Berkeley, et al..|
|Jan 19 2018||Waiver of right of respondent City of Berkeley to respond filed.|
|Jan 24 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.|
|Jan 30 2018||Response Requested. (Due March 1, 2018)|
|Jan 30 2018||Brief amici curiae of The Cato Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Cause of Action Institute filed.|
|Feb 06 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation filed.|
|Feb 08 2018||Brief amici curiae of Retail Litigation Center, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Feb 08 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed.|
|Feb 08 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The National Association of Manufacturers filed.|
|Feb 22 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Association of National Advertisers, Inc. filed.|
|Feb 23 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 1, 2018 to March 31, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Feb 23 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Feb 27 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 2, 2018.|
|Feb 27 2018||Brief amici curiae of Institute for Justice and National Federation of Independent Business filed.|
|Apr 02 2018||Brief of respondents City of Berkeley, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Apr 17 2018||Reply of petitioner CTIA - The Wireless Association filed.|
|Apr 18 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/10/2018.|
|Jun 27 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/27/2018.|
|Jun 28 2018||Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, 585 U. S. ____ (2018).|
|Jul 30 2018||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.