|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-1280||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit erred in concluding that the guidelines set by an advocacy organization – providing for sex reassignment surgery instead of hormone therapy and counseling for gender dysphoria – constitute the constitutional minima for inmate medical care under the Eighth Amendment, when the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 5th, 10th and 11th Circuits have all concluded that they do not; and (2) whether the 9th Circuit’s holding that a prison health-care provider’s individualized medical decision was unreasonable and therefore constituted deliberate indifference, regardless of his subjective reasoning, conflicts with Estelle v. Gamble, holding that mere negligence does not establish deliberate indifference, and Farmer v. Brennan, holding the provider must have known of and disregarded a substantial risk of serious harm to find deliberate indifference.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 06 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 11, 2020)|
|May 06 2020||Application (19A1038) for a stay pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|May 13 2020||Response to application (19A1038) requested by Justice Kagan, due Monday, May 18, by 4 p.m. ET|
|May 18 2020||Response to application from respondent Adree Edmo filed.|
|May 21 2020||Reply of applicants Idaho Department of Correction, et al. filed.|
|May 21 2020||Application (19A1038) referred to the Court.|
|May 21 2020||Application (19A1038) denied by the Court. Justice Thomas and Justice Alito would grant the application.|
|May 29 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 11, 2020 to August 10, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jun 02 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 10, 2020.|
|Aug 10 2020||Brief of respondent Adree Edmo in opposition filed.|
|Aug 24 2020||Reply of petitioners Idaho Department of Correction, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 24 2020||Suggestion of mootness filed by petitioners Idaho Department of Correction, et al. (Distributed)|
|Aug 26 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.|
|Sep 03 2020||Response to suggestion of mootness from respondent Adree Edmo filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 11 2020||Reply in support of suggestion of mootness filed by petitioners Idaho Department of Correction, et al. (Distributed)|
|Oct 05 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.|
|Oct 13 2020||Petition DENIED. Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins, dissenting from the denial of certiorari: I would hold that the case is moot and direct that the decision below be vacated. United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.