|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-894||Fed. Cir.||Nov 4, 2014||Jan 21, 2015||7-2||Roberts||OT 2014|
Holding: A federal air marshal who publicly disclosed that the TSA had decided to cut costs by removing air marshals from certain long-distance flights is entitled to protection under the federal whistleblower statute because his disclosure does not fall within the statute’s exception for disclosures “specifically prohibited by law.” Although the disclosure was specifically prohibited by a TSA regulation, the exception does not apply to rules and regulations, nor was it specifically prohibited by the statute that authorized the TSA to promulgate those regulations.
Judgment: Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on January 21, 2015. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Kennedy joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 18 2013||Application (13A503) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 28, 2013 to December 28, 2013, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Nov 19 2013||Application (13A503) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until December 28, 2013.|
|Dec 17 2013||Application (13A503) to extend further the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 28, 2013 to January 27, 2014, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Dec 18 2013||Application (13A503) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until January 27, 2014.|
|Jan 27 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 26, 2014)|
|Feb 14 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including March 28, 2014.|
|Mar 28 2014||Brief of respondent Robert J. MacLean in opposition filed.|
|Apr 15 2014||Reply of petitioner Department of Homeland Security filed.|
|Apr 16 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 2, 2014.|
|May 5 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 15, 2014.|
|May 19 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|May 30 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 25, 2014.|
|May 30 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 22, 2014.|
|Jun 27 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Jul 25 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Jul 25 2014||Brief of petitioner Department of Homeland Security filed.|
|Aug 19 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Sep 4 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, November 4, 2014.|
|Sep 8 2014||Record requested from U.S.C.A. for the Federal Circuit.|
|Sep 9 2014||The Record received from U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Sep 10 2014||Brief amicus curiae of David B. Nolan, Sr. filed.|
|Sep 19 2014||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 22 2014||Brief of respondent Robert J. MacLean filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amicus curiae of United States Office of Special Counsel filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amicus curiae of American Federation of Government Employees filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Former U.S. Government Officials filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Rutherford Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amici curiae of Blacks in Government, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amicus curiae of FlyersRights.org filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Project on Government Oversight filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief amici curiae of Members of Congress filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 22 2014||Reply of petitioner Department of Homeland Security filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 4 2014||Argued. For petitioner: Ian H. Gershengorn, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Neal K. Katyal, Washington, D. C.|
|Jan 21 2015||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Scalia, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kennedy, J., joined.|
|Feb 23 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
FWOTSC. You figure that one out.*
h/t to @marinklevy for the story and the always-entertaining threads.
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).