|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1003||N.D. Cal.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2017|
Issues: (1) Whether the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether the acting secretary's decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 18 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due February 20, 2018)|
|Jan 19 2018||Motion to Expedite filed by petitioner Department of Homeland Security, et al.|
|Jan 22 2018||Response to motion from respondents States of California, et al. filed.|
|Jan 22 2018||Response to motion from respondents Regents of the University of California; Janet Napolitano, President of the University of California filed.|
|Jan 22 2018||Response to motion from respondents Dulce Garcia, Miriam Gonzalez Avila, Saul Jimenez Suarez, Viridiana Chabolla Mendoza, Norma Ramirez, and Jirayut Latthivongskorn filed.|
|Jan 22 2018||Reply in support of motion to expedite filed by petitioner Department of Homeland Security, et al.|
|Jan 23 2018||The motion of petitioners to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is granted in part. As respondents have agreed, they will file their briefs in opposition by February 2, 2018.|
|Jan 25 2018||Brief amici curiae of The States of Texas, et al. filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, Dulce Garcia, Miriam Gonzalez Avila, Saul Jimenez Suarez, Viridiana Chabolla Mendoza, Norma Ramirez, and Jirayut Latthivongskorn.|
|Jan 31 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.|
|Feb 02 2018||Brief of respondents States of California, et al. in opposition filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 02 2018||Brief of respondents Regents of the University of California; Janet Napolitano, President of the University of California in opposition filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 02 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 02 2018||Brief of respondents Dulce Garcia, et al. in opposition filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 02 2018||Brief amici curiae of Citizens United, et al. filed.(Distributed)|
|Feb 07 2018||Reply of petitioners Department of Homeland Security, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 15 2018||Letter of February 14, 2018 from the Solicitor General received. (Distributed)|
|Feb 20 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2018.|
|Feb 26 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment DENIED without prejudice. It is assumed that the Court of Appeals will proceed expeditiously to decide this case.|
SCOTUS will hear oral argument at 10:00 a.m. EST about when claimants must raise claims in the administrative process – “exhausting” their administrative remedies. Read more from Ronald Mann.
It might sound exhausting! But we claim it might be fun.
Justices to weigh issue exhaustion for Social Security claimants - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in Carr v. Saul involves a surprisingly basic question of administrative law: when claimants ...
Who you calling “shrinking”? — the shadow docket
With #SCOTUS’s shrinking docket, we have to wonder if @SCOTUSblog will become a bi-monthly publication.
The Supreme Court will take up voting rights this morning.
Oral argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EST.
Justices to consider whether Arizona’s voting rules discriminate against minorities - SCOTUSblog
The 2020 elections may be over, but the Supreme Court will soon hear oral argument in a pair of voting-rights ...
Tomorrow morning the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a pair of voting rights cases involving Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which prohibits policies or laws that result in racial discrimination in voting.
Missed the morning orders? @AHoweBlogger's got you covered. Read about the new grants including a review of Puerto Rico’s eligibility for a federal benefits program. Plus, she's got an overview of several high-profile petitions still under consideration.
Court will review Puerto Rico’s eligibility for federal benefits program - SCOTUSblog
The court on Monday morning issued orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Feb. 26. The justic...
NEW: SCOTUS agrees to take up two new cases. Here's the orders list. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030121zor_m6hn.pdf
#SCOTUS grants US v. Vaello-Madero, a challenge to exclusion of Puerto Rico residents from eligibility for Supplemental Social Security Income program, which provides benefits to poor disabled adults & children
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.