|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1519||5th Cir.||Apr 18, 2018||May 29, 2018||9-0||Breyer||OT 2017|
Holding: In a provision of the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 that requires certain convicted defendants to “reimburse the victim for . . . expenses incurred during participation in the investigation or prosecution of the offense or attendance at proceedings related to the offense,” 18 U. S. C. §3663A(b)(4), the words “investigation” and “proceedings” are limited to government investigations and criminal proceedings and do not include private investigations and civil or bankruptcy proceedings.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on May 29, 2018.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 15 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 21, 2017)|
|Jul 12 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 21, 2017.|
|Aug 14 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including September 20, 2017.|
|Sep 18 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including October 26, 2017.|
|Oct 24 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including November 30, 2017.|
|Nov 30 2017||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Dec 08 2017||Waiver of the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner Sergio F.Lagos.|
|Dec 13 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2018.|
|Dec 13 2017||Reply of petitioner Sergio F.Lagos filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 08 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/12/2018.|
|Jan 12 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 09 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Sergio F.Lagos.|
|Feb 23 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.|
|Feb 26 2018||Brief of petitioner Sergio F.Lagos filed.|
|Feb 26 2018||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Mar 05 2018||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 05 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Shon Hopwood filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 07 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 28 2018||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2018||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.|
|Apr 11 2018||Reply of petitioner Sergio F.Lagos filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 18 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex. For respondent: Michael R. Huston, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|May 29 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jul 02 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Quick Tok explainer on yesterday’s voting rights case at the Supreme Court—Merrill v. Milligan.
The Mar-a-Lago case arrives at the Supreme Court. Here's an explainer on today's filing from @katieleebarlow, who notes that this isn't the first time Trump has asked the justices to intervene in fights over sensitive documents. (Both other times, the court ruled against him.)
In today's Voting Rights Act case, the conservative majority seemed likely to side with Alabama, though perhaps on narrower grounds than the state asked for. Here's @AHoweBlogger's analysis, plus courtroom sketches from Bill Hennessy (AKA @Artisbest).
Conservative justices seem poised to uphold Alabama’s redistricting plan in Voting Rights Act challenge - SCOTUSblog
In February, a divided Supreme Court temporarily blocked a ruling by a three-judge district court in Alabama, which ...
BREAKING: Donald Trump's lawyers have filed an emergency request asking the Supreme Court to intervene in the case over classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Trump wants SCOTUS to vacate a Sept. 21 ruling by the 11th Circuit. Here is the filing: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/22A283.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: voting rights and veterans' benefits.
First up is Merrill v. Milligan, a case about Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and how to decide if a state's redistricting plan dilutes Black voting power. @AHoweBlogger explains:
When are majority-Black voting districts required? In Alabama case, the justices will review that question. - SCOTUSblog
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bars election practices that result in a denial or abridgement of the right ...