|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-5421||5th Cir.||Not Argued||Mar 23, 2020||N/A||Per Curiam||OT 2019|
Holding: There is no legal basis for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s practice of declining to review certain unpreserved factual arguments for plain error.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded in a per curiam opinion on March 23, 2020.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jul 29 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 30, 2019)|
|Aug 07 2019||Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.|
|Aug 15 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.|
|Aug 22 2019||Response Requested. (Due September 23, 2019)|
|Sep 20 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 23, 2019 to October 23, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Sep 23 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 23, 2019.|
|Oct 18 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 23, 2019 to November 22, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 21 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 22, 2019.|
|Oct 25 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 22, 2019 to December 6, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 25 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 6, 2019.|
|Dec 06 2019||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Dec 23 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.|
|Dec 23 2019||Reply of petitioner Charles Earl Davis filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 08 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Jan 30 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.|
|Feb 24 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2020.|
|Mar 02 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.|
|Mar 16 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2020.|
|Mar 23 2020||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion)|
|Apr 24 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
Senator Markey (D-Ma) is delivering remarks right now in front of the Supreme Court introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the court to 13 justices. He’s flanked by Chairman of House Judiciary, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Hank Johnson (D-Ga).
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:
Cast your vote below!
The “great chief” and the “super chief”: A final showdown in Supreme Court March Madness - SCOTUSblog
Forget Ali vs. Frazier, Celtics vs. Lakers, or Evert vs. Navratilova. It’s time for Marshall vs. Warren. After...
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.