|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-7120||8th Cir.||Apr 20, 2015||Jun 26, 2015||8-1||Scalia||OT 2014|
Holding: Imposing an increased sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act’s residual clause violates due process.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on June 26, 2015. Justice Kennedy and Justice Thomas filed opinions concurring in the judgement. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 28 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 29, 2013)|
|Nov 20 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 30, 2013.|
|Dec 20 2013||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including January 29, 2014.|
|Jan 24 2014||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including February 28, 2014.|
|Feb 28 2014||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Mar 20 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 4, 2014.|
|Apr 7 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 18, 2014.|
|Apr 21 2014||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED.|
|May 16 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 26, 2014.|
|May 16 2014||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 18, 2014.|
|Jun 13 2014||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Samuel James Johnson.|
|Jun 26 2014||Brief of petitioner Samuel James Johnson filed.|
|Jun 30 2014||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Jul 3 2014||Brief amici curiae of Gun Owners of America, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Aug 18 2014||Brief of respondent the United States filed.|
|Aug 25 2014||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed.|
|Aug 25 2014||Brief amici curiae of The Brady Center for Gun Violence, et al. filed.|
|Sep 4 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 5, 2014.|
|Sep 8 2014||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit.|
|Sep 15 2014||Record received from U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit. 1 - Envelope|
|Sep 17 2014||Reply of petitioner Samuel James Johnson filed.|
|Sep 19 2014||CIRCULATED|
|Nov 5 2014||Argued. For petitioner: Katherine M. Menendez, Assistant Federal Defender, Minneapolis, Minn. For respondent: John F. Bash, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jan 9 2015||This case is restored to the calendar for reargument. The parties are directed to file supplemental briefs addressing the following question: "Whether the residual clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U. S. C. §924(e)(2)(B)(ii), is unconstitutionally vague." The supplemental brief of petitioner is due on or before Wednesday, February 18, 2015. The supplemental brief of the United States is due on or before Friday, March 20, 2015. The reply brief, if any, is due on or before Friday, April 10, 2015. The time to file amicus curiae briefs is as provided for by Rule 37.3(a). The word limits and cover colors for the briefs should correspond to the provisions of Rule 33.1(g) pertaining to briefs on the merits rather than to the provision pertaining to supplemental briefs. The case will be set for oral argument during the April 2015 argument session.|
|Feb 18 2015||Supplemental brief of petitioner Samuel James Johnson filed.|
|Feb 25 2015||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.|
|Mar 6 2015||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, April 20, 2015|
|Mar 16 2015||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 17 2015||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit.|
|Mar 20 2015||Supplemental brief of respondent United States filed (Reprinted). (Distributed)|
|Mar 25 2015||Record received from U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit. (1-Envelope)|
|Mar 25 2015||Record received from U.S.D.C. District of Minnesota. The record is electronic, also 1 envelope (SEALED).|
|Apr 10 2015||Supplemental reply brief of petitioner Samuel James Johnson filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 20 2015||Reargued. For petitioner: Katherine M. Menendez, Assistant Federal Defender, Minneapolis, Minn. For respondent: Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 26 2015||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., and Thomas, J., filed opinions concurring the judgment. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|Jul 28 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In yet another Friday night shadow docket order, a divided Supreme Court sides with challengers to California’s COVID-related restrictions. Brief per curiam opinion and dissent from Justice Kagan: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf
By vote of 5-4, #SCOTUS blocks California's COVID-related restrictions on in-home prayer meetings and worship. Opinion & Kagan's dissent are here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf
President Biden will sign an executive order authorizing a commission to study Supreme Court reform. The commission will review “the length of service and turnover of justices on the court; the membership and size of the court” among other topics.
President Biden to Sign Executive Order Creating the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States | The White House
President Biden will today issue an executive order forming the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States, comprised of a
The Supreme Court will hear April and May oral arguments remotely but with a live audio feed.
#SCOTUS confirms that "[i]n keeping with public health guidance in response to COVID-19," it will hear oral arguments in April and on May 4 remotely, as it has for the other argument sessions this term. Press release here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Media-Advisory-Teleconference-Arguments.pdf
In a Monday evening shadow-docket filing, Tennessee asks the Supreme Court to reinstate a state law that imposes a 48-hour waiting period for patients to abortions. A federal judge struck down the waiting period as unconstitutional. @AHoweBlogger explains:
Tennessee asks court to restore waiting period for abortions - SCOTUSblog
Tennessee filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court on Monday, asking the justices for permission to enforce...
BREAKING: In major copyright battle between tech giants, SCOTUS sides w/ Google over Oracle, finding that Google didnt commit copyright infringement when it reused lines of code in its Android operating system. The code came from Oracle's JAVA SE platform. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
NEW: The Supreme Court agrees to take up one new case, Brown v. Davenport. It's a technical but important question about the standard for federal courts reviewing habeas claims to assess whether constitutional violations were "harmless error." https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/040521zor_3204.pdf
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.