|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-525||5th Cir.||Apr 22, 2019||Jun 2, 2019||9-0||Ginsburg||OT 2018|
Holding: The charge-filing precondition to suit set out in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not a jurisdictional requirement.
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on June 2, 2019.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 18 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 19, 2018)|
|Nov 12 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 19, 2018 to December 19, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 14 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 19, 2018.|
|Dec 19 2018||Brief of respondent Lois Davis in opposition filed.|
|Dec 21 2018||Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed.|
|Dec 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.|
|Dec 26 2018||Reply of petitioner Fort Bend County filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 29 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Lois Davis.|
|Feb 04 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Fort Bend County.|
|Feb 11 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 22, 2019|
|Feb 25 2019||Brief of petitioner Fort Bend County filed.|
|Feb 25 2019||Joint appendix filed.|
|Feb 27 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Scott Dodson in support of neither party filed.|
|Mar 04 2019||Brief amici curiae of Center for Workplace Compliance, et al. filed.|
|Mar 04 2019||Brief amici curiae of National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. filed.|
|Mar 20 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 21 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.|
|Mar 27 2019||Brief of respondent Lois Davis filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 03 2019||Brief amicus curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 03 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 03 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 03 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Apr 03 2019||Brief amici curiae of National Employment Lawyers Association and The Employee Rights Advocacy Institute for Law & Policy filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 12 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 12 2019||Reply of petitioner Fort Bend County filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 22 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Colleen E. Roh Sinzdak, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Raffi Melkonian, Houston, Tex.; and Jonathan C. Bond, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Jun 03 2019||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jul 05 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.