|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|14-419||11th Cir.||Nov 10, 2015||Mar 30, 2016||5-3||Breyer||OT 2015|
Holding: The pretrial freeze of a criminal defendant's legitimate, untainted assets violates the Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 5-3, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on March 30, 2016. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Kennedy filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 7 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 10, 2014)|
|Oct 16 2014||Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.|
|Oct 20 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Oct 22 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 7, 2014.|
|Oct 28 2014||Response Requested . (Due November 28, 2014)|
|Nov 18 2014||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 29, 2014.|
|Nov 26 2014||Brief amici curiae of U.S. Justice Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Nov 28 2014||Brief amici curiae of Associations of Criminal Defense Attorneys filed.|
|Dec 23 2014||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including February 27, 2015.|
|Feb 18 2015||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including March 30, 2015.|
|Mar 30 2015||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Apr 15 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 1, 2015.|
|Apr 16 2015||Reply of petitioner Sila Luis filed. (Distributed)|
|May 1 2015||Rescheduled.|
|May 4 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 14, 2015.|
|May 18 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 21, 2015.|
|May 26 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 28, 2015.|
|Jun 1 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 4, 2015.|
|Jun 8 2015||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 15 2015||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 18, 2015.|
|Jun 15 2015||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 30, 2015.|
|Aug 4 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party, or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Aug 18 2015||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Aug 18 2015||Brief of petitioner Sila Luis filed.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amici curiae of United States Justice Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute and the DKT Liberty Project filed.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Americans for Forfeiture Reform filed.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amicus curiae of New York Council of Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed.|
|Aug 25 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Rutherford Institute filed.|
|Sep 9 2015||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, November 10, 2015|
|Sep 10 2015||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit.|
|Sep 21 2015||Record received from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Florida is electronic and located on PACER, with the exception of one SEALED Document. (1 envelope)|
|Sep 22 2015||The record from the U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Sep 30 2015||Brief of respondent United States filed.|
|Oct 2 2015||CIRCULATED|
|Oct 7 2015||Brief amici curiae of National Association of State Legislators, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 9 2015||Motion of Americans for Forfeiture Reform out-of-time for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Oct 29 2015||Reply of petitioner Sila Luis filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 30 2015||Motion of Americans for Forfeiture Reform out-of-time for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument DENIED.|
|Nov 10 2015||Argued. For petitioner: Howard Srebnick, Miami, Fla. For respondent: Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Mar 30 2016||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Kennedy, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Alito, J., joined. Kagan, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|May 2 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
|Jul 26 2016||Records from U.S.D.C. Southern Dist. of Florida has been returned.|
Experts continue to analyze last week's Fulton decision. Here are the final pieces in our symposium.
Thomas Berg & Douglas Laycock on the future of free-exercise challenges: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/protecting-free-exercise-under-smith-and-after-smith/
Holly Hollman on the ruling's many unresolved questions: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/court-requires-religious-exemption-but-leaves-many-questions-unanswered/
The first two pieces in our symposium on yesterday's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia are up. First, @JimOleske dissects the decision in light of the court's shadow-docket ruling in Tandon v. Newsom, which took a very different approach to free exercise.
Here’s @AHoweBlogger’s analysis on the Supreme Court’s major NCAA ruling today.
NCAA athletes win 9-0 on educational perks as Kavanaugh calls out ban on direct payments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday reshaped the relationship between universities and the athletes who play college sports. ...
SCOTUSblog is hiring!
We're seeking a new blog manager -- a fun and fast-paced role that includes writing articles, tracking statistics, managing the content on our site, and helping to plan and execute all our news coverage of the court.
SCOTUSblog is hiring a new blog manager - SCOTUSblog
SCOTUSblog is seeking a new blog manager. We are looking for a smart, creative person who is fascinated by the ...
After the Supreme Court handed down three opinions this morning, 12 cases remain outstanding for this term. They include voting rights, student free speech, and anonymous donors. We expect more opinions on Wednesday, June 23 at 10:00 a.m. ET.
We will open the live blog at 9:45.
The third and final opinion of the day is in U.S. v. Arthrex. In a fragmented decision, the court holds that the appointment of administrative patent judges violated the Constitution’s appointments clause because they are not “inferior” officers. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-1434_ancf.pdf
NEW: In a victory for college athletes, SCOTUS unanimously invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateurism" rules. The court says the NCAA can no longer bar colleges from providing athletes with education-related benefits such as free laptops or paid post-graduate internships.
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.