|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-604||N.C.||Oct 6, 2014||Dec 15, 2014||8-1||Roberts||OT 2014|
Disclosure: Kevin Russell of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the petitioner in this case at the cert. stage through the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, but he is not participating in the case at the merits stage.
Holding: A police officer’s reasonable mistake of law gives rise to reasonable suspicion that justifies a traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment.
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-1, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on December 15, 2014. Justice Kagan filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 13 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 18, 2013)|
|Dec 6 2013||Waiver of right of respondent North Carolina to respond filed.|
|Dec 6 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, rreceived from counsel for the respondent.|
|Dec 18 2013||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 24 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 10, 2014.|
|Jan 6 2014||Response Requested . (Due February 5, 2014)|
|Jan 29 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including March 7, 2014.|
|Mar 7 2014||Brief of respondent North Carolina in opposition filed.|
|Mar 18 2014||Reply of petitioner Nicholas Brady Heien filed.|
|Mar 19 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 4, 2014.|
|Apr 7 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 18, 2014.|
|Apr 21 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|May 13 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 9, 2014.|
|May 13 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 14, 2014.|
|May 22 2014||Order further extending time to file respondent's brief on the merits to and including July 21, 2014.|
|May 22 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|May 28 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Jun 9 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Jun 9 2014||Brief of petitioner Nicholas Brady Heien filed.|
|Jun 16 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Gun Owners Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Jun 16 2014||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Jun 16 2014||Brief amici curiae of Professors Charles E. MacLean & Adam Lamparello filed.|
|Jun 16 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Rutherford Institute filed.|
|Jul 9 2014||Record requested from Supreme Court of North Carolina.|
|Jul 14 2014||Record received from the Supreme Court of North Carolina. The record is electronic.|
|Jul 18 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, October 6, 2014|
|Jul 21 2014||Brief of respondent North Carolina filed.|
|Jul 28 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Jul 28 2014||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.|
|Jul 28 2014||Brief amici curiae of Wisconsin, et al. filed.|
|Jul 28 2014||Brief amici curiae of The Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, et al. filed.|
|Aug 7 2014||CIRCULATED.|
|Aug 20 2014||Reply of petitioner Nicholas Brady Heien filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 29 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 6 2014||Argued. For petitioner: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. For respondent: Robert C. Montgomery, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, N. C.; and Rachel P. Kovner, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Dec 15 2014||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Kagan, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|Jan 16 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Wait wut.. RBG ghost-wrote the equal protection bits of Obergefell?!
And I learned this on @SCOTUSblog’s TikTok?! https://www.tiktok.com/@scotusblog/video/6922179577724931333
"This is not our first commission rodeo” says Levy. 😉
Love this write up of the @BrookingsInst's panel yesterday with @Susan_Hennessey, @danepps,@cdkang76, and @mollyereynolds.
Thanks, @SCOTUSblog and Kalvis Golde!
Spilling SCOTUS tea on TikTok today. Well, actually, @eskridgebill spilled the tea, we just tok’d about it. 🍵
The Supreme Court got rid of several cases this morning -- in one fell swoop. Read @AHoweBlogger's latest coverage of the emoluments cases, spiritual advisers at Texas executions, Texas abortion policies, COVID restrictions, and NY political corruption.
Justices vacate rulings on Trump and emoluments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday morning released orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. 22. The justices once again did not ac...
In this morning's orders list, SCOTUS took no action on pending cert petitions involving:
- Mississippi's near-ban on abortions after 15 weeks,
- a Trump rule banning Title X clinics from providing abortion referrals,
- the Trump administration's "public charge" immigration rule.