|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-1084||11th Cir.||Not Argued||Jul 2, 2021||6-3||Per Curiam||OT 2020|
Holding: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit erred in characterizing the Alabama court’s case-specific analysis as a “categorical rule” that any prisoner will always lose an ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim if he fails to call and question trial counsel concerning his or her actions and reasoning; the Alabama court did not violate clearly established federal law when it rejected Reeves’ ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded in a per curiam opinion on July 2, 2021. Justice Breyer dissented. Justices Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Kagan joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 05 2021||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 11, 2021)|
|Feb 17 2021||Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 11, 2021 to April 12, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Feb 18 2021||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 12, 2021.|
|Mar 11 2021||Brief amici curiae of State of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Apr 12 2021||Brief of respondent Matthew Reeves in opposition filed.|
|Apr 27 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.|
|Apr 27 2021||Reply of petitioner Commissioner, Alabama Dept. of Corrections filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 30 2021||Record Requested.|
|May 03 2021||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit. The record is electronic.|
|May 04 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/20/2021.|
|May 24 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/27/2021.|
|Jun 01 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/3/2021.|
|Jun 07 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/10/2021.|
|Jun 14 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/17/2021.|
|Jun 21 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.|
|Jul 01 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 7/1/2021.|
|Jul 02 2021||Petition GRANTED. Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED for proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Court. Justice Breyer dissents. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion) Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Kagan joins, dissenting. (Detached Opinion)|
|Aug 03 2021||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.