|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-415||9th Cir.||Apr 20, 2016||Jun 20, 2016||6-2||Kennedy||OT 2015|
Holding: The Fair Labor Standards Act exempts “any salesman, partsman, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles” from an employer’s general obligation to pay overtime to employees who work more than forty hours in a week. Because the Department of Labor’s 2011 interpretation of this provision was issued without the reasoned explanation that was required in light of the department’s change in position and the significant reliance interests involved, the provision must be construed without placing controlling weight on that interpretation.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 6-2, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy on June 20, 2016. Justice Ginsburg filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 19 2015||Application (15A210) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 30, 2015 to September 30, 2015, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Aug 20 2015||Application (15A210) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until September 30, 2015.|
|Sep 30 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 4, 2015)|
|Oct 5 2015||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 4, 2015.|
|Nov 4 2015||Brief amici curiae of National Automobile Dealers Association, et al. filed.|
|Dec 4 2015||Brief of respondents Hector Navarro, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 22 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 8, 2016.|
|Dec 22 2015||Reply of petitioner Encino Motorcars, LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 15, 2016.|
|Jan 15 2016||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 29 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondents|
|Feb 1 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.|
|Feb 29 2016||Joint appendix filed.|
|Feb 29 2016||Brief of petitioner Encino Motorcars, LLC filed.|
|Mar 4 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday April 20, 2016|
|Mar 7 2016||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Mar 7 2016||Brief amici curiae of National Automobile Dealers Association, et al. filed.|
|Mar 14 2016||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Mar 15 2016||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 30 2016||Brief of respondents Hector Navarro, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 5 2016||Brief amicus curiae of International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 6 2016||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 6 2016||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Apr 6 2016||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 6 2016||Brief amici curiae of National Employment Lawyers Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 8 2016||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 13 2016||Reply of petitioner Encino Motorcars, LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 14 2016||Letter, dated14 April 2016, received from counsel for respondents filed. (Distributed).|
|Apr 20 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Paul D. Clement, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Stephanos Bibas, Philadelphia, Pa.; and Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae).|
|Jun 20 2016||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Sotomayor, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Alito, J., joined.|
|Jul 22 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
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...