|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-8695||5th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether, under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, the state’s decision to deprive Mr. Gutierrez of the opportunity to be accompanied during his execution by a religious adviser employed by the prison substantially burdens the exercise of his religion, requiring the state to justify the deprivation as the least restrictive means of advancing a compelling governmental interest; and (2) whether, for purposes of the free exercise clause, the state’s blanket policy of denying all prisoners the aid of a religious adviser at the time of the execution—adopted for the acknowledged purpose of avoiding the obligation to allow such a minister to a Buddhist prisoner—burdens Mr. Gutierrez’s exercise of religion without legitimate justification.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 15 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 15, 2020)|
|Jun 15 2020||Application (19A1052) for a stay of execution of sentence of death, submitted to Justice Alito.|
|Jun 15 2020||Motion for leave to file amicus brief and motion for leave to file brief in compliance with Rule 33.2 filed by Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops.|
|Jun 15 2020||Brief of respondents Bryan Collier, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jun 16 2020||Reply of petitioner Ruben Gutierrez filed.|
|Jun 16 2020||Application (19A1052) referred to the Court.|
|Jun 16 2020||Application (19A1052) granted by the Court. The application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is granted pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court. The District Court should promptly determine, based on whatever evidence the parties provide, whether serious security problems would result if a prisoner facing execution is permitted to choose the spiritual adviser the prisoner wishes to have in his immediate presence during the execution.|
|Jun 25 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.|
|Aug 10 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Oct 05 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.|
|Oct 05 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Oct 13 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/16/2020.|
|Oct 13 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Oct 26 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/30/2020.|
|Oct 26 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 02 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/6/2020.|
|Nov 02 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 09 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/13/2020.|
|Nov 10 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 16 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/20/2020.|
|Nov 17 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 30 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.|
|Nov 30 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 30 2020||Supplemental brief of petitioner Ruben Gutierrez filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 30 2020||Motion for Leave to File District Court's Order of Ruben Gutierrez not accepted for filing. (December 09, 2020)|
|Dec 07 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.|
|Dec 07 2020||Rescheduled.|
|Dec 07 2020||Supplemental brief of respondents Bryan Collier, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 04 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.|
|Jan 11 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/15/2021.|
|Jan 19 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.|
|Jan 25 2021||The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The June 12, 2020 order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granting the motion to vacate the stay of execution previously issued by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas is vacated. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with instructions to remand the case to the District Court for further and prompt consideration of the merits of petitioner’s underlying claims regarding the presence of a spiritual advisor in the execution chamber in light of the District Court’s November 24, 2020 findings of fact. Although this Court’s stay of execution shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court, the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari is without prejudice to a renewed application regarding a stay of execution should petitioner’s execution be rescheduled before resolution of his claims regarding the presence of a spiritual advisor in the execution chamber.|
|Feb 26 2021||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
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.
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.