|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-6086||2d Cir. -||Oct 2, 2018||Jun 20, 2019||5-3||Kagan||OT 2018|
Holding: The judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit that 34 U. S. C. §20913(d) – which requires the U.S. attorney general to apply the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s registration requirements as soon as feasible to offenders convicted before the statute’s enactment – is not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority is affirmed.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-3, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 20, 2019. Justice Kagan announced the judgment of the Supreme Court and delivered an opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor joined. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas joined. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|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.|
|Jun 20 2019||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kagan, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, J., joined. Kavanaugh, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Jul 11 2019||Petition for Rehearing filed.|
|Jul 11 2019||DISTRIBUTED.|
|Aug 05 2019||Rescheduled.|
|Aug 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.|
|Oct 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.|
|Oct 15 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/18/2019.|
|Oct 28 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.|
|Nov 04 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/8/2019.|
|Nov 12 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2019.|
|Nov 18 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2019.|
|Nov 25 2019||Rehearing DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
|Nov 26 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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 ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
Senator Markey (D-Ma) is delivering remarks right now in front of the Supreme Court introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the court to 13 justices. He’s flanked by Chairman of House Judiciary, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Hank Johnson (D-Ga).
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:
Cast your vote below!
The “great chief” and the “super chief”: A final showdown in Supreme Court March Madness - SCOTUSblog
Forget Ali vs. Frazier, Celtics vs. Lakers, or Evert vs. Navratilova. It’s time for Marshall vs. Warren. After...
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.