|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-9572||Miss.||Mar 20, 2019||Jun 21, 2019||7-2||Kavanaugh||OT 2018|
Holding: The trial court at Curtis Flowers’ sixth murder trial committed clear error in concluding that the state’s peremptory strike of a particular black prospective juror was not motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh on June 21, 2019. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined as to Parts I, II, and III.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 30 2018||Application (17A1205) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 23, 2018 to July 7, 2018, submitted to Justice Alito.|
|May 02 2018||Application (17A1205) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until June 22, 2018.|
|Jun 22 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 26, 2018)|
|Jul 17 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 26, 2018 to August 27, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jul 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 27, 2018.|
|Jul 26 2018||Brief amici curiae of Magnolia Bar Association, Mississippi Center for Justice, and Innocence Project New Orleans filed.|
|Aug 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 27, 2018 to September 26, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 23 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 26, 2018.|
|Sep 27 2018||Brief of respondent Mississippi in opposition filed.|
|Oct 09 2018||Reply of petitioner Curtis Flowers filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 11 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.|
|Oct 29 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/2/2018.|
|Nov 02 2018||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED limited to the following question: Whether the Mississippi Supreme Court erred in how it applied Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79 (1986), in this case.|
|Nov 20 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits filed.|
|Nov 27 2018||Motion to extend the time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including December 27, 2018.|
|Dec 27 2018||Brief amicus curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. filed.|
|Dec 27 2018||Joint appendix filed (2 Volumes). (Statement of costs filed)|
|Dec 27 2018||Brief of petitioner Curtis Flowers filed.|
|Jan 03 2019||Brief amici curiae of Former Justice Department Officials filed.|
|Jan 08 2019||Motion of respondent for an extension of time filed.|
|Jan 15 2019||Motion to extend the time to file respondent's brief on the merits is granted to and including February 7, 2019.|
|Jan 25 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, March 20, 2019|
|Feb 07 2019||Brief of respondent State of Mississippi filed.|
|Feb 14 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Feb 26 2019||Record received from the Supreme Court of Mississippi is electronic and complete.|
|Mar 07 2019||Reply of petitioner Curtis Flowers filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 20 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Sheri Lynn Johnson, Ithaca, N. Y. For respondent: Jason Davis, Special Assistant Attorney General, Jackson, Miss.|
|Jun 21 2019||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kavanaugh, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed a concurring opinion. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch, J., joined as to Parts I, II, and III.|
|Jul 23 2019||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Jul 23 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Nov 06 2019||MANDATE ISSUED.|
Monday's decision rejecting sentence reductions for low-level crack-cocaine offenders may have been unanimous, but @ekownyankah writes that there is far more going on than the ruling's dry textual analysis might indicate. Read his incisive analysis here:
After decades, Congress reduced the racially unjust crack/cocaine disparity... raising amounts required for prison time. Why would Congress have left small time dealers to rot in prison for decades?
My thoughts on SCOTUS's ruling in Terry v. United States:https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/unanimous-ruling-on-crack-cocaine-disparity-is-heavy-on-text-light-on-history/
No more SCOTUS opinions for today. There are 18 cases still outstanding from the current term, including disputes over Obamacare, religious rights and voting rights. The next opinion day that we know of is Thursday.
SCOTUS rules 9-0 that people convicted of certain low-level crack-cocaine offenses are not eligible for re-sentencing under the First Step Act, a 2018 law that made some criminal-justice reforms retroactive. Here is the opinion in Terry v. United States. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-5904_i4dk.pdf
SCOTUS sides with the gov in 2 cases about whether certain criminal defendants are entitled to new trials / new plea hearings as a result of the court's 2019 ruling in Rehaif v. United States which narrowed a federal law barring people with felony convictions from possessing guns
In a relatively quiet Monday morning order list, SCOTUS takes up no new cases. But it does invite the federal government to submit a brief on the pending petition that asks the justices to take up a challenge to Harvard's affirmative action policy. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/061421zor_6j36.pdf
The Supreme Court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. ET followed by opinion(s?) at 10:00.
There are 21 opinions outstanding including Obamacare, LGBTQ+ rights vs. religious liberty, and student speech.
We’ll crank up the live blog at 9:25. Join us!
Announcement of orders and opinions for Monday, June 14 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Monday, June 14, as the court releases orders from the June 10 conference and one ...
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.