|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1026||Idaho -||Oct 30, 2018||Feb 27, 2019||6-3||Sotomayor||OT 2018|
Holding: The presumption of prejudice for Sixth Amendment purposes recognized in Roe v. Flores-Ortega applies regardless of whether a defendant has signed an appeal waiver.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on February 27, 2019. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined and in which Justice Alito joined as to Parts I and II.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 23 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 23, 2018)|
|Feb 21 2018||Waiver of right of respondent State of Idaho to respond filed.|
|Feb 22 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Ethics Bureau at Yale filed.|
|Feb 22 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Idaho Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Mar 07 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/23/2018.|
|Mar 08 2018||Response Requested. (Due April 9, 2018)|
|Mar 16 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 9, 2018 to June 8, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 16 2018||Response to motion to extend the time to file a response from petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed.|
|Mar 20 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part, and the time is extended to and including May 15, 2018.|
|May 08 2018||Brief of respondent State of Idaho in opposition filed.|
|May 21 2018||Reply of petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed.|
|May 22 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/7/2018.|
|Jun 11 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.|
|Jun 18 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 21 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jul 03 2018||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 10, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 17, 2018.|
|Jul 17 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr.|
|Aug 10 2018||Brief of petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed.|
|Aug 16 2018||Brief amici curiae of Idaho Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Ethics Bureau at Yale filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.|
|Aug 20 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 30, 2018|
|Aug 24 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Sep 10 2018||Record requested from the Supreme Court of Idaho.|
|Sep 12 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 17 2018||Brief of respondent State of Idaho filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amici curiae of Louisiana, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 09 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.|
|Oct 17 2018||Reply of petitioner Gilberto Garza, Jr. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 30 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Amir H. Ali, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Lead Deputy Attorney General, Boise, Idaho; and Allon Kedem, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae).|
|Feb 27 2019||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch, J., joined, and in which Alito, J., joined as to Parts I and II.|
|Apr 01 2019||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Apr 01 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Today at SCOTUS: Two oral arguments starting at 10 a.m. EST. One is on federal anti-discrimination laws. The other is on Medicare payments for drugs dispensed by hospitals -- with big questions about the doctrine of Chevron deference lurking in the background.
Bill Cosby’s prosecutors asked the Supreme Court to reinstate his conviction today. Quick explainer.
In our latest episode of SCOTUStalk, @shefalil of @19thnews joined us to preview Wednesday's argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. Shefali explains the current state of abortion access and the case's implications in Mississippi and across America.
Roe, Dobbs, and the current state of abortion access - SCOTUSblog
In advance of Wednesday's oral argument in the momentous abortion case, Shefali Luthra, a gender and health care r...
Update: Without calling for a response or referring the case to the full court, Justice Breyer just rejected last week's challenge from Massachusetts hospital workers who object to the hospital's COVID vaccine mandate.
(Breyer handles emergency requests from Massachusetts.)
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket challenge to a COVID vaccine mandate. This one is from employees at Mass General Brigham who say the Boston-based hospital violated federal law by not granting them exemptions from the hospital's vaccine policy. Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/21A175.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral argument in a case about Medicare payments to hospitals that serve low-income patients. Lots of money at stake, plus potential implications for the Chevron doctrine. @JACoganJr explains the case:
Money for safety-net hospitals at stake in dispute over Medicare payment formula - SCOTUSblog
When it comes to highlighting the complexity of the Medicare Act and its hospital payment rules, Becerra v. Empire...
Two days from now, SCOTUS will hear the biggest abortion case in a generation. In a battle over a Mississippi law, abortion opponents are asking the court to end the constitutional right to abortion. Here's our preview of the case, via @AHoweBlogger.
Roe v. Wade hangs in balance as reshaped court prepares to hear biggest abortion case in decades - SCOTUSblog
When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would...