|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-449||2nd Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2021|
Issues: (1) Whether entities that are not subject to the public-charge ground of inadmissibility contained in Immigration and Nationality Act, and which seek to expand benefits usage by aliens who are potentially subject to that provision, are proper parties to challenge the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's final rule interpreting the statutory term “public charge” and establishing a framework by which DHS personnel are to assess whether an alien is likely to become a public charge; and (2) whether the final rule is likely contrary to law or arbitrary and capricious.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 07 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 9, 2020)|
|Oct 23 2020||Motion of Make the Road New York, et al. to extend the time to file a response from November 9, 2020 to December 9, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 23 2020||Motion State of New York, et al. to extend the time to file a response from November 9, 2020 to December 9, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 26 2020||The motions to extend the time to file responses are granted and the time is extended to and including December 9, 2020, for all respondents.|
|Nov 03 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, United States Department of Homeland Secuirty, et al.|
|Nov 20 2020||Motion of New York, et al. to extend the time to file a response from December 9, 2020 to January 8, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 20 2020||Motion of the MRNY Respondents to extend the time to file a response from December 9, 2020 to January 8, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 20 2020||Response to motions from petitioner United States Department of Homeland Secuirty, et al. filed.|
|Nov 27 2020||The motions to further extend the time to file responses to the petition for a writ of certiorari are DENIED.|
|Dec 09 2020||Brief of respondents States of New York, Connecticut, and Vermont; and City of New York in opposition filed.|
|Dec 09 2020||Brief of respondents Make the Road New York, African Services Committee, Asian American Federation, Catholic Charities Community Services (Archdiocese of New York), and Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 23 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.|
|Dec 23 2020||Reply of petitioners United States Department of Homeland Secuirty, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 19 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.|
|Feb 12 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.|
|Feb 22 2021||Petition GRANTED.|
|Mar 09 2021||Joint stipulation to dismiss the case pursuant Rule 46.1 filed.|
|Mar 09 2021||Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...