|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-1031||Ariz.||Mar 20, 2017||May 15, 2017||8-0||Breyer||OT 2016|
Holding: A state court may not order a veteran to indemnify a divorced spouse for the loss in the divorced spouse's portion of the veteran's retirement pay caused by the veteran's waiver of retirement pay to receive service-related disability benefits.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on May 15, 2017. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 16 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 17, 2016)|
|Mar 11 2016||Brief of respondent Sandra Howell in opposition filed.|
|Mar 28 2016||Reply of petitioner John Howell filed.|
|Mar 30 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 15, 2016.|
|Apr 18 2016||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|Oct 17 2016||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Nov 1 2016||Supplemental brief of petitioner John Howell filed.|
|Nov 2 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 22, 2016.|
|Nov 28 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 2, 2016.|
|Dec 2 2016||Petition GRANTED.|
|Dec 22 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.|
|Dec 22 2016||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner John Howell.|
|Dec 29 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for respondent.|
|Jan 9 2017||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Jan 17 2017||Brief of petitioner John Howell filed.|
|Jan 24 2017||Brief amici curiae of Veterans of Foreign Wars, and Operation Firing for Effect filed.|
|Feb 3 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 20, 2017|
|Feb 3 2017||Record requested from the Supreme Court of Arizona.|
|Feb 16 2017||Brief of respondent Sandra Howell filed.|
|Feb 21 2017||Record received from the Supreme Court of Arizona. The record is electronic.|
|Feb 22 2017||CIRCULATED.|
|Feb 23 2017||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 23 2017||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 6 2017||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Mar 13 2017||Reply of petitioner John Howell filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 20 2017||Argued. For petitioner: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Charles W. Wirken, Phoenix, Ariz.; and Ilana H. Eisenstein, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|May 15 2017||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Gorsuch, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Jun 19 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Jun 19 2017||MANDATE ISSUED|
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).
Incidentally, Gorsuch had been scheduled to give a speech at the University of Wyoming today, but his visit was canceled due to COVID.
Nothing from Kagan or Gorsuch though 😢 https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1438530948207874050