|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-1032||10th Cir.||Dec 8, 2014||Mar 3, 2015||9-0||Thomas||OT 2014|
Holding: A lawsuit by a trade association of retailers, alleging that a Colorado law requiring retailers that do not collect sales or use taxes to notify any Colorado customer of the state’s tax requirement and to report tax-related information to those customers and the Colorado Department of Revenue violates the federal and state constitutions, is not barred by the Tax Injunction Act.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on March 3, 2015. Justice Kennedy filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined, and in which Justice Sotomayor joined in part.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 16 2013||Application (13A633) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 30, 2013 to February 28, 2014, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.|
|Dec 19 2013||Application (13A633) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until February 28, 2014.|
|Feb 25 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 31, 2014)|
|Mar 10 2014||Waiver of right of respondent Barbara Brohl, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Revenue to respond filed.|
|Mar 26 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 18, 2014.|
|Mar 31 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Council on State Taxation filed.|
|Apr 7 2014||Response Requested . (Due May 7, 2014)|
|Apr 22 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including June 6, 2014.|
|Jun 6 2014||Brief of respondent Barbara Brohl, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Revenue in opposition filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 10 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2014.|
|Jun 17 2014||Reply of petitioner Direct Marketing Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 30 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 30, 2014.|
|Jul 1 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 31 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Aug 1 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Aug 6 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 9, 2014.|
|Aug 6 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 17, 2014.|
|Sep 4 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, December 8, 2014.|
|Sep 9 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Sep 9 2014||Brief of petitioner Direct Marketing Association filed.|
|Sep 15 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Professionals in Taxation filed.|
|Sep 16 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Tax Foundation filed.|
|Sep 16 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Sep 16 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Council on State Taxation filed.|
|Sep 16 2014||Brief amici curiae of NFIB Small Business Legal Center, et al. filed.|
|Sep 22 2014||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit.|
|Oct 17 2014||Brief of respondent Barbara Brohl, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Revenue filed.|
|Oct 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of National Governors Association, et al., filed.|
|Oct 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of States of Illinois, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 24 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Multistate Tax Commission filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 24 2014||Brief amici curiae of Interested Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 27 2014||CIRCULATED.|
|Oct 31 2014||Record received from U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit. The record is electronic and located on PACER. One box of records also received from the 10th Circuit.|
|Nov 17 2014||Reply of petitioner Direct Marketing Association filed. (distributed)|
|Dec 8 2014||Argued. For petitioner: George S. Isaacson, Lewiston, Maine. For respondent: Daniel D. Domenico, Solicitor General, Denver, Colo.|
|Mar 3 2015||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion. Ginsburg, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Breyer, J., joined, and in which Sotomayor, J., joined in part.|
|Apr 6 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Apr 8 2015||Record from U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit has been returned.|
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.