|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.|
Here's today's order list: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011822zor_5iel.pdf
The court doesn't add any new cases to its docket, and takes no action on major pending petitions involving affirmative action in higher education & religious objections to nondiscrimination laws meant to protect LGBTQ people.
As she did last week, Sonia Sotomayor will participate in this week's arguments remotely, SCOTUS says. @NinaTotenberg reported this morning that Sotomayor's decision is the result of Neil Gorsuch's refusal to wear a mask on the bench. All other justices have agreed to wear masks.
Today at SCOTUS: The court will release orders on pending petitions at 9:30 a.m., followed by two oral arguments starting at 10 -- one on a First Amendment spat over a Boston flag policy; the other on a family's quest to reclaim an Impressionist painting taken in WWII by Nazis.
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...