|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-123||9th Cir.||Mar 20, 2013||Jun 10, 2013||9-0||Thomas||OT 2012|
Holding: A farmer who is deemed to have violated an agricultural marketing order, is fined, has a fine assessed against him, and seeks to argue that the fine is an unconstitutional “taking” can bring his “takings” claim in a regular federal district court without first paying the fine; he is not required to bring that claim in the Court of Federal Claims.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on June 10, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 4 2012||Administrative record from U.S. Dept. of Justice is electronic.|
|May 29 2012||Application (11A1125) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 10, 2012 to August 9, 2012, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Jun 1 2012||Application (11A1125) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until July 25, 2012.|
|Jul 25 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 27, 2012)|
|Aug 21 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including September 26, 2012.|
|Aug 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed.|
|Sep 19 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including October 26, 2012.|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief of respondent Department of Agriculture in opposition filed.|
|Nov 5 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 20, 2012.|
|Nov 5 2012||Reply of petitioners Marvin D. Horne, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 20 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Dec 21 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including January 9, 2013.|
|Dec 21 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including February 12, 2013.|
|Jan 7 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, March 20, 2013|
|Jan 9 2013||Brief of petitioners Marvin D. Horne, et al. filed.|
|Jan 9 2013||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received)|
|Jan 16 2013||Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed.|
|Jan 16 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Jan 16 2013||Brief amici curiae of Constitutional Law Scholars filed.|
|Jan 16 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Texas filed.|
|Jan 18 2013||Record from U.S.C.A. for 9th Circuit is electronic.|
|Jan 18 2013||Record from U.S.D.C. for Eastern Districtof California (Fresno) is electronic.|
|Jan 23 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Feb 4 2013||Administrative record from U.S. Dept. of Justice is electronic.|
|Feb 12 2013||Brief of respondent Department of Agriculture filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2013||Brief amicus curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Sun-Maid Growers of California filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 13 2013||Reply of petitioners Marvin D. Horne, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 20 2013||Argued. For petitioners: Michael W. McConnell, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Joseph R. Palmore, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 10 2013||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jul 12 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
The Supreme Court sides with Sen. Ted Cruz in his First Amendment challenge to a federal campaign-finance law that limits how and when candidates can recoup loans that they make to their own campaigns. The vote is 6-3 along ideological lines.
In an immigration case, SCOTUS rules 5-4 that federal courts do NOT have jurisdiction to review certain executive-branch factual findings that determine whether non-citizens are eligible for "adjustment of status." Those findings can dictate whether a person is deported.
SCOTUS agrees to take up two new cases: Jones v. Hendrix (a habeas corpus case) and SEC v. Cochran (a case about the power of district courts to hear challenges to the constitutionality of the SEC's administrative law proceedings). Full order list here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/051622zor_hgcj.pdf
We're live now on SCOTUSblog's homepage or at https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/05/announcement-of-orders-and-opinions-for-monday-may-16/
Today at SCOTUS: The court will issue one or more opinions in argued cases at 10 a.m. EDT. But first, orders on pending petitions at 9:30. We'll fire up our live blog at 9:25 to break it all down and answer your questions. Grab some ☕️ and come join us: https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/05/announcement-of-orders-and-opinions-for-monday-may-16/
Today at SCOTUS: The court will issue one or more opinions in argued cases at 10 a.m. EDT. But first, orders on pending petitions at 9:30. We'll fire up our live blog at 9:25 to break it all down and answer your questions. Grab some ☕️ and come join us:
Announcement of orders and opinions for Monday, May 16 - SCOTUSblog
On Monday, May 16, we will be live blogging as the court releases orders from the May 12 conference and opinio...
We can announce, however, that we'll be liveblogging the release of orders from today's conference AND opinions, starting at around 9:25 @SCOTUSblog. Please join us to discuss the leak, pending opinions, and whatever other SCOTUS-related issues are on your mind. https://twitter.com/AHoweBlogger/status/1524788054434660353
#SCOTUS will release opinions from argued cases at 10 am on Monday. The Court does not announce in advance how many opinions it will release or which ones.