Enter your email address to subscribe to updates to this case (by doing so, you are accepting the terms in our privacy policy):

Gundy v. United States

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
17-6086	2d Cir. -	Oct 2, 2018 Tr.Aud.	TBD	TBD	TBD	OT 2018

Issue: Whether the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s delegation of authority to the attorney general to issue regulations under 42 U.S.C. § 16913 violates the nondelegation doctrine.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

First Mondays, OT2018 #4: “This Is About Frogs” (First Mondays)
Argument analysis: Justices grapple with nondelegation challenge (Mila Sohoni)
OT2018 #1: "Rearranging Deck Chairs" (First Mondays)
Argument preview: Justices face nondelegation challenge to federal sex-offender registration law (Mila Sohoni)
OT2018 #0: "Looks A Lot Like Grift" (First Mondays)
Justices grant review in two new cases (Amy Howe)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Sep 20 2017	Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 23, 2017)
Sep 29 2017	Waiver of right of respondents United States to respond filed.
Oct 05 2017	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2017.
Oct 17 2017	Response Requested. (Due November 16, 2017)
Nov 09 2017	Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 18, 2017.
Dec 18 2017	Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
Jan 04 2018	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/19/2018.
Jan 16 2018	Rescheduled.
Feb 05 2018	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.
Feb 20 2018	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2018.
Feb 26 2018	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/2/2018.
Mar 05 2018	Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari is GRANTED limited to Question 4 presented by the petition.
Mar 13 2018	Motion for an extension of time filed.
Mar 14 2018	Motion to extend the briefing schedule on the merits is granted . The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including May 25, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 2, 2018.
May 24 2018	Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute & Cause of Action Institute filed.
May 25 2018	Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
May 25 2018	Brief of petitioner Herman Gundy filed.
May 30 2018	Brief amicus curiae of The National Association of Federal Defenders filed.
May 30 2018	Brief amici curiae of Competitive Enterprise Institute, Reason Foundation, Cascade Policy Institute filed.
May 31 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amicus curiae of New Civil Liberties Alliance filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amici curiae of Downsize DC Foundation, et al. filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Justice filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amici curiae of Scholars Whose Work Includes Sex Offense Studies filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Liberties Union filed.
Jun 01 2018	Brief amici curiae of William D. Araiza and 14 Other Constitutional, Criminal and Administrative Law Professors filed.
Jun 01 2018	Amicus brief of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty not accepted for filing. (A corrected brief has been submitted - June 1, 2018)
Jun 01 2018	Brief amicus curiae of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed.
Jul 09 2018	SET FOR ARGUMENT On Tuesday, October 2, 2018
Aug 02 2018	Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
Aug 03 2018	CIRCULATED
Aug 07 2018	Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.
Aug 08 2018	Record received from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit. The record is electronic.
Sep 04 2018	Reply of petitioner Herman Gundy filed. (Distributed)
Oct 02 2018	Argued. For petitioner: Sarah Baumgartel, New York, N. Y. For respondent: Jeffrey B. Wall, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.

Featured Posts

A trademark case with colorful language: Amy Howe and Mark Walsh talk through Iancu v. Brunetti – SCOTUStalk

Court to take up LGBT rights in the workplace (Updated) – Amy Howe

Academic highlight: Levitt on the collateral consequences of Department of Commerce v. New York – Amanda Frost
Sponsored by Casetext
SCOTUStalk see all
Email Digest Sign-Up
Receive a daily email digest from Feedburner by entering your email.
Merits Case Pages and Archives

Archives

or

This Week at the Court
The Supreme Court released orders from the April 18 conference on Monday; the justices agreed to decide Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, consolidated with Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd., and Barton v. Barr. The justices also called for the views of the U.S. solicitor general in Putnam Investments, LLC v. Brotherston.
There is a possibility of opinions on Tuesday at 10 a.m.
On Monday, the justices heard oral argument in Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media and Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis.
On Tuesday, the justices hear oral argument in Department of Commerce v. New York, Mitchell v. Wisconsin and Rehaif v. United States.
On Wednesday, the justices hear oral argument in Quarles v. United States and Taggart v. Lorenzen.
On Friday, the justices meet for their April 26 conference.
Major Cases
- Department of Commerce v. New York
  (1) Whether the district court erred in enjoining the secretary of the Department of Commerce from reinstating a question about citizenship to the 2020 decennial census on the ground that the secretary’s decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq; (2) whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the APA, a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker -- including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking executive branch officials -- without a strong showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis; and (3) whether the secretary’s decision to add a citizenship question to the decennial census violated the enumeration clause of the U.S. Constitution.
- Lamone v. Benisek
  In case in which the plaintiffs allege that a Maryland congressional district was gerrymandered to retaliate against them for their political views: (1) whether the various legal claims articulated by the three-judge district court are unmanageable; (2) whether the three-judge district court erred when, in granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, it resolved disputes of material fact as to multiple elements of plaintiffs’ claims, failed to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and treated as “undisputed” evidence that is the subject of still-unresolved hearsay and other evidentiary objections; and (3) whether the three-judge district court abused its discretion in entering an injunction despite the plaintiffs’ years-long delay in seeking injunctive relief, rendering the remedy applicable to at most one election before the next decennial census necessitates another redistricting.
- Kisor v. Wilkie
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Auer v. Robbins and Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., which direct courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation.
- Rucho v. Common Cause
  (1) Whether plaintiffs have standing to press their partisan gerrymandering claims; (2) whether plaintiffs’ partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable; and (3) whether North Carolina’s 2016 congressional map is, in fact, an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.
- The American Legion v. American Humanist Association
  (1) Whether a 93-year-old memorial to the fallen of World War I is unconstitutional merely because it is shaped like a cross; (2) whether the constitutionality of a passive display incorporating religious symbolism should be assessed under the tests articulated in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Van Orden v. Perry, Town of Greece v. Galloway or some other test; and (3) whether, if the test from Lemon v. Kurtzman applies, the expenditure of funds for the routine upkeep and maintenance of a cross-shaped war memorial, without more, amounts to an excessive entanglement with religion in violation of the First Amendment.
- Gamble v. United States
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule the “separate sovereigns” exception to the double jeopardy clause.
see all this term’s cases »
Recent Decisions
- Biestek v. Berryhill A vocational expert’s refusal to provide private market-survey data during a Social Security disability benefits hearing upon the applicant’s request does not categorically preclude the testimony from counting as “substantial evidence” in federal court under 42 U. S. C. §405(g).
- Bucklew v. Precythe Baze v. Rees and Glossip v. Gross govern all Eighth Amendment challenges alleging that a method of execution inflicts unconstitutionally cruel pain; Russell Bucklew’s as-applied challenge to Missouri’s single-drug execution protocol -- that it would cause him severe pain because of his particular medical condition -- fails to satisfy the Baze-Glossip test.
- Lorenzo v. Securities and Exchange Commission Dissemination of false or misleading statements with intent to defraud can fall within the scope of Securities and Exchange Commission Rules 10b–5(a) and (c), as well as the relevant statutory provisions, even if the disseminator cannot be held liable under Rule 10b–5(b).
- Republic of Sudan v. Harrison When civil process is served on a foreign state under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 U. S. C. §1608(a)(3) requires a mailing to be sent directly to the foreign minister’s office in the foreign state.
- Sturgeon v. Frost Alaska’s Nation River is not public land; and like all non-public lands and navigable waters within Alaska’s national parks, it is exempt under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act from the National Park Service’s ordinary regulatory authority.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. (1) Whether a state may require health-care facilities to dispose of fetal remains in the same manner as other human remains, i.e., by burial or cremation; and (2) whether a state may prohibit abortions motivated solely by the race, sex or disability of the fetus and require abortion doctors to inform patients of the prohibition.
- City of Newport Beach, California v. Vos (1) Whether Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires law enforcement officers to provide accommodations to an armed, violent and mentally ill suspect in the course of bringing the suspect into custody; (2) whether, under the Fourth Amendment “totality of the circumstances” analysis for assessing the reasonableness of force used against a suspect who attacks law enforcement officers, a court must take into account allegedly unreasonable police conduct that took place before the use of force, but foreseeably created the need to use that force; and (3) whether, under the Fourth Amendment’s analysis for use of force, a law enforcement officer’s interest in using deadly force against a suspect threatening an officer’s life is diminished if the assailant is mentally ill.
- Dahne v. Richey Whether prison inmates have a First Amendment right to include threatening, abusive and irrelevant language in grievances.
More Petitions »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 65

Cases decided 31

Summary reversals 4

Merits cases granted to date 74

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Full Calendar Submit Event

Apr. 2019

Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
	1 Orders Opinions	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12 Conference	13
14	15 Orders IANCU V. BRUNETTI (18-302) EMULEX CORP. V. VARJABEDIAN (18-459)	16 PARKER DRILLING MANAGEMENT SERVICES V. NEWTON (18-389) NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE V. KAESTNER FAMILY TRUST (18-457)	17 UNITED STATES V. DAVIS (18-431) MCDONOUGH V. SMITH (18-485)	18 Conference	19	20
21	22 Orders FOOD MARKETING INSTITUTE V. ARGUS LEADER MEDIA (18-481) FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS V. DAVIS (18-525)	23 MITCHELL V. WISCONSIN (18-6210) REHAIF V. UNITED STATES (17-9560) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE V. NEW YORK (18-966) Opinions	24 QUARLES V. UNITED STATES (17-778) TAGGART V. LORENZEN (18-489)	25	26 Conference	27
28	29 Orders	30

Orders/Opinions
Arguments
Conferences

Events
Holidays
Multiple

Download our App in the Apple Store
Videos see all

Justice Thomas at Pepperdine Law School

On March 30, Justice Clarence Thomas spoke with former clerk Brittney Lane Kubisch and Pepperdine University President-elect James Gash at Pepperdine University School of Law. Thomas told the audience that he had no plans to retire from the Supreme Court.

Peabody Award
Awarded the Peabody Award for excellence in electronic media.
Sigma Delta Chi
Awarded the Sigma Delta Chi deadline reporting award for online coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
National Press Club Award
Awarded the National Press Club's Breaking News Award for coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
Silver Gavel Award
Awarded the Silver Gavel Award by the American Bar Association for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system.
American Gavel Award
Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Webby Award
Awarded the Webby Award for excellence on the internet.

Cases argued	65
Cases decided	31
Summary reversals	4
Merits cases granted to date	74

Editor's Note :

Gundy v. United States

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Featured Posts

A trademark case with colorful language: Amy Howe and Mark Walsh talk through Iancu v. Brunetti – SCOTUStalk

Court to take up LGBT rights in the workplace (Updated) – Amy Howe

Academic highlight: Levitt on the collateral consequences of Department of Commerce v. New York – Amanda Frost

Sponsored by Casetext

SCOTUStalk see all

Email Digest Sign-Up

Merits Case Pages and Archives

Major Cases

Recent Decisions

Current Relists

Conference of April 19, 2019

Recent Special Features

Live Blog Archives

Apr. 2019

Download our App in the Apple Store

Videos see all

Peabody Award

Sigma Delta Chi

National Press Club Award

Silver Gavel Award

American Gavel Award

Webby Award