|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-564||Fla. S. Ct.||Oct 31, 2012||Mar 26, 2013||5-4||Scalia||OT 2012|
Holding: A dog sniff at the front door of a house where the police suspected drugs were being grown constitutes a search for purposes of the Fourth Amendment.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on March 26, 2013. Justice Kagan filed a concurring opinion in which Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor joined. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion in which Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Breyer joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 26 2011||Application (11A348) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from October 5, 2011 to October 27, 2011, submitted to Justice Thomas.|
|Oct 5 2011||Application (11A348) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until October 27, 2011.|
|Oct 26 2011||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 5, 2011)|
|Oct 26 2011||Appendix of Florida filed.|
|Dec 2 2011||Brief of respondent Joelis Jardines in opposition filed.|
|Dec 2 2011||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent.|
|Dec 5 2011||Brief amici curiae of Texas, et al. filed.|
|Dec 14 2011||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 6, 2012.|
|Dec 15 2011||Reply of petitioner Florida filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 6 2012||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED.|
|Jan 6 2012||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Jan 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Wayne County, Michigan filed.|
|Feb 17 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including March 22, 2012.|
|Mar 21 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is further extended to and including April 26, 2012.|
|Apr 26 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Apr 26 2012||Brief of petitioner Florida filed.|
|Apr 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Police Canine Association and Police K-9 Magazine filed.|
|May 3 2012||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.|
|May 3 2012||Brief amici curiae of Texas, et al. filed.|
|May 11 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 25, 2012.|
|Jun 25 2012||Brief of respondent Joelis Jardines filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief amici curiae of Fourth Amendment Scholars filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Rutherford Institute filed.|
|Jul 16 2012||Application (12A54) to extend the time to file a reply brief on the merits from July 25, 2012 to August 9, 2012, submitted to Justice Thomas.|
|Jul 18 2012||Application (12A54) denied by Justice Thomas.|
|Jul 23 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Jul 23 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, October 31, 2012|
|Jul 25 2012||Reply of petitioner Florida filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 2 2012||CIRCULATED|
|Aug 22 2012||Record received from Supreme Court of Florida. (1box)|
|Oct 31 2012||Argued. For petitioner: Gregory G. Garre, Washington, D. C.; and Nicole A. Saharsky, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Howard K. Blumberg, Assistant Public Defender, Miami, Fla.|
|Mar 26 2013||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Thomas, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Kagan, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Ginsburg and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy and Breyer, JJ., joined.|
|Apr 29 2013||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Jun 3 2013||Record returned to Supreme Court of Florida.|
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.