|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-453||Cal. Ct. App.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2018|
Issue: Whether reckless or knowing false statements about a living public figure, published in a docudrama format, are entitled to absolute First Amendment protection from claims based on the victim’s statutory and common law causes of action for defamation and right of publicity to justify dismissal at the pleading stage.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 05 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 13, 2018)|
|Nov 13 2018||Brief of respondents FX Networks, LLC, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Nov 26 2018||Reply of petitioner Olivia de Havilland filed.|
|Nov 28 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.|
|Jan 07 2019||Petition DENIED.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.