|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-14||D.C. Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 16|
Issues: (1) What, if any, deference is due an agency's interpretation when it predominately interprets terms of common law in which courts, not administrative agencies, have special competence; (2) whether the circuit court erred when it held, in contravention of this Court's long-standing definition of “common carrier,” that pilots who use the Internet to communicate are “common carriers” when those pilots do not earn a commercial profit or indiscriminately offer to share their travel plans with the general public, thus warranting remand; and (3) whether the circuit court erred in holding that the Federal Aviation Administration could, consistent with the First Amendment, lawfully discriminate against content-based Internet communications because of the message conveyed and the means chosen by pilots to convey it.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 10 2016||Application (15A1168) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 24, 2016 to June 24, 2016, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|May 12 2016||Application (15A1168) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until June 24, 2016.|
|Jun 24 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 1, 2016)|
|Jun 27 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Jul 25 2016||Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed.|
|Jul 29 2016||Brief amici curiae of Southeastern Legal Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Aug 1 2016||Waiver of right of respondent Federal Aviation Administration to respond filed.|
|Aug 10 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 26, 2016.|
|Aug 12 2016||Response Requested . (Due September 12, 2016)|
|Sep 8 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including October 12, 2016.|
|Sep 29 2016||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including November 14, 2016.|
|Nov 14 2016||Brief of respondent Federal Aviation Administration in opposition filed.|
|Nov 23 2016||Reply of petitioner Flytenow, Inc. filed.|
|Nov 30 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 6, 2017.|
|Jan 9 2017||Petition DENIED.|
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...
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.