|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|14-1280||3d Cir.||Jan 19, 2016||Apr 26, 2016||6-2||Breyer||OT 2015|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the respondents in this case.
Holding: When an employer demotes an employee out of a desire to prevent the employee from engaging in protected political activity, the employee is entitled to challenge that unlawful action under the First Amendment and Section 1983 even if the employer's actions are based on a factual mistake about the employee's behavior.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-2, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on April 26, 2016. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 22 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 26, 2015)|
|May 22 2015||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including June 25, 2015.|
|May 28 2015||Waiver of right of respondent Police Chief James Wittig to respond filed.|
|Jun 25 2015||Brief of respondents City of Paterson, New Jersey, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jul 7 2015||Reply of petitioner Jeffrey J. Heffernan filed.|
|Jul 15 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 28, 2015.|
|Oct 1 2015||Petition GRANTED.|
|Nov 2 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondents.|
|Nov 12 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Nov 16 2015||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Nov 16 2015||Brief of petitioner Jeffrey J. Heffernan filed.|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Government Employees filed.|
|Nov 23 2015||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Nov 23 2015||Brief amicus curiae of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed.|
|Nov 23 2015||Brief amici curiae of Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, et al. filed.|
|Nov 24 2015||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, January 19, 2016|
|Dec 4 2015||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 3rd Circuit.|
|Dec 15 2015||CIRCULATED.|
|Dec 16 2015||Brief of respondents City of Paterson, New Jersey, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 21 2015||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Dec 21 2015||Record from the U.S.C.A. 3rd Circuit is electronic.|
|Dec 21 2015||The record from the U.S.D.C. District of New Jersey (Newark) is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Dec 23 2015||Brief amicus curiae of New Jersey State League of Municipalities filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 23 2015||Brief amici curiae of National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 5 2016||Reply of petitioner Jeffrey J. Heffernan filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 8 2016||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Jan 19 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Mark Frost, Philadelphia, Pa.; and Ginger D. Anders, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae). For respondents: Thomas C. Goldstein, Bethesda, Md.|
|Apr 26 2016||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Alito, J., joined.|
|May 31 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
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.
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
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.