|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-1143||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit correctly holds that tribal jurisdiction over nonmembers is established whenever an exception under Montana v. United States is met, or whether, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 7th and 8th Circuits have held, a court must also determine that the exercise of such jurisdiction stems from the tribe’s inherent authority to set conditions on entry, preserve tribal self-government or control internal relations; and (2) whether the 9th Circuit has construed the Montana exceptions to swallow the general rule that tribes lack jurisdiction over nonmembers. CVSG: 12/9/2020.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 16 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 17, 2020)|
|Apr 03 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 17, 2020 to May 20, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 20, 2020.|
|Apr 17 2020||Brief amici curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Apr 17 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Retail Litigation Center, Inc. filed.|
|May 20 2020||Brief of respondent Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in opposition filed.|
|Jun 09 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/25/2020.|
|Jun 09 2020||Reply of petitioner FMC Corporation filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 29 2020||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|Dec 09 2020||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Dec 23 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.|
|Dec 23 2020||Supplemental brief of petitioner FMC Corporation filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2021||Petition DENIED.|
Tomorrow morning the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a pair of voting rights cases involving Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which prohibits policies or laws that result in racial discrimination in voting.
Missed the morning orders? @AHoweBlogger's got you covered. Read about the new grants including a review of Puerto Rico’s eligibility for a federal benefits program. Plus, she's got an overview of several high-profile petitions still under consideration.
Court will review Puerto Rico’s eligibility for federal benefits program - SCOTUSblog
The court on Monday morning issued orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Feb. 26. The justic...
NEW: SCOTUS agrees to take up two new cases. Here's the orders list. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030121zor_m6hn.pdf
#SCOTUS grants US v. Vaello-Madero, a challenge to exclusion of Puerto Rico residents from eligibility for Supplemental Social Security Income program, which provides benefits to poor disabled adults & children
Good morning. It’s Monday, and it’s March!
At 9:30 a.m. EST, SCOTUS will release orders from Friday’s conference.
At 10:00, the court will consider an appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges. More from George Quillin & Jeanne Gills.
Justices to consider appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges - SCOTUSblog
The justices continue their light load for the February argument session next week. First up is Monday’s Unite...
BREAKING: SCOTUS orders California’s Santa Clara County to allow churches to hold indoor services. Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan dissent. Here’s the short shadow docket order.
#SCOTUS grants emergency request from northern California churches to allow indoor worship services pending appeal, says result is "clearly dictated" by recent decision. Kagan dissents, joined by Breyer & Sotomayor: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022621zr_1bo2.pdf
Just in: SCOTUS opinions expected next Thursday.
#SCOTUS website indicates that the Court will release orders from today's conference on Monday morning, March 1, at 9:30 am, with opinions again on Thursday, March 4, at 10 am. Justices will also hear oral arguments next week, including in Arizona voting dispute on Tuesday.
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.