|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-646||11th Cir.||Dec 6, 2018||Jun 17, 2019||7-2||Alito||OT 2018|
Holding: The dual-sovereignty doctrine – under which two offenses are not the “same offence” for double jeopardy purposes if prosecuted by separate sovereigns – is upheld.
Judgment: Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 17, 2019. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg and Justice Gorsuch filed dissenting opinions.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 24 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 4, 2017)|
|Nov 30 2017||Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 4, 2017 to January 3, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 30 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 3, 2018.|
|Dec 04 2017||Brief amici curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center and Cato Institute filed.|
|Dec 26 2017||Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 3, 2018 to February 2, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Dec 28 2017||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including February 2, 2018.|
|Jan 16 2018||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Jan 30 2018||Reply of petitioner Terance Gamble filed.|
|Mar 21 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.|
|Apr 16 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/20/2018.|
|Apr 23 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/27/2018.|
|May 07 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/10/2018.|
|May 14 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/17/2018.|
|May 21 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/24/2018.|
|May 29 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/31/2018.|
|Jun 04 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/7/2018.|
|Jun 11 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.|
|Jun 18 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/21/2018.|
|Jun 27 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/27/2018.|
|Jun 28 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 23 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file the opening briefs on the merits filed.|
|Aug 01 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file the opening briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 4, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 25, 2018.|
|Sep 04 2018||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Sep 04 2018||Brief of petitioner Terance Gamble filed.|
|Sep 07 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Howard University School of Law Thurgood Marshall Civil Rights Center in support of neither party filed.|
|Sep 10 2018||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Appellate Defense Division, et al. filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Senator Orrin Hatch filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center, et al. filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of Criminal Procedure Professors Stephen E. Henderson, et al. filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of Criminal Defense Experts filed.|
|Sep 11 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed.|
|Oct 09 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, December 5, 2018|
|Oct 15 2018||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit.|
|Oct 18 2018||Record received from the U.S.D.C. Southern Dist. of Alabama is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Oct 19 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Oct 25 2018||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 29 2018||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit is electronic, complete and located on PACER.|
|Nov 01 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Indigenous Women's Resource Center et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 01 2018||Brief amici curiae of Texas, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 01 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Counties, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 01 2018||Motion for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed by Texas, et al.|
|Nov 05 2018||Opposition of petitioner to motion of Texas, et al., filed.|
|Nov 06 2018||Response of respondent to motion of Texas, et al., filed.|
|Nov 06 2018||Reply of Texas, et al. in support of motion, filed.|
|Nov 19 2018||Motion of Texas, et al. for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for enlargement of time for oral argument is GRANTED and the time is allotted as follows: 40 minutes for the petitioner, 30 minutes for the respondent, and 10 minutes for Texas, et al.|
|Nov 20 2018||Letter of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 21 2018||Reply of petitioner Terance Gamble filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 03 2018||RESCHEDULED FOR ARGUMENT ON Thursday, December 6, 2018|
|Dec 06 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Louis A. Chaiten, Cleveland, Ohio. For respondent: Eric J. Feigin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For Texas, et al., as amici curiae: Kyle D. Hawkins, Texas Solicitor General, Austin, Tex.|
|Jun 17 2019||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion. Ginsburg, J., and Gorsuch, J., filed dissenting opinions.|
|Jul 19 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
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.