|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-988||Wash. Ct. App.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issue: Whether the prior-substantiation doctrine—which makes a commercial speaker liable if it lacks adequate “substantiation” for its factual claims before making them in an advertisement, even if the speech is never proven to be false—violates the First Amendment.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 10 2019||Application (19A646) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 1, 2020 to February 3, 2020, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Dec 10 2019||Application (19A646) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until February 3, 2020.|
|Feb 03 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 9, 2020)|
|Feb 12 2020||Waiver of right of respondent State of Washington to respond filed.|
|Feb 19 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.|
|Feb 27 2020||Response Requested. (Due March 30, 2020)|
|Feb 28 2020||Brief amici curiae of Robert M McKenna and Michael C Turpen filed.|
|Mar 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 30, 2020 to May 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 10 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 29, 2020.|
|Mar 11 2020||Brief amici curiae of Goldwater Institute; Cato Institute; Reason Foundation filed.|
|Mar 27 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Liberty Justice Center filed.|
|Mar 27 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence filed.|
|Mar 30 2020||Brief amici curiae of Kentucky, et al. filed.|
|May 05 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 29, 2020 to June 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|May 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 29, 2020.|
|Jun 29 2020||Brief of respondent State of Washington in opposition filed.|
|Jul 13 2020||Reply of petitioners Living Essentials, LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 15 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.|
|Oct 05 2020||Petition DENIED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
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.