|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-1191||2d Cir.||Nov 9, 2016||Jun 12, 2017||8-0||Ginsburg||OT 2016|
Holding: (1) The gender line Congress drew in Section 1409(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act -- which creates an exception for an unwed U.S.-citizen mother, but not for such a father, to the physical-presence requirement for the transmission of U.S. citizenship to a child born abroad -- is incompatible with the Fifth Amendment's requirement that the government accord to all persons "the equal protection of the laws"; and (2) because the Supreme Court is not equipped to convert Section 1409(c)'s exception into the main rule displacing other relevant provisions of the statute, it falls to Congress to select a uniform prescription that neither favors nor disadvantages any person on the basis of gender.
Judgment: Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on June 12, 2017. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part, in which Justice Alito joined. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 12 2016||Application (15A858) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 29, 2016 to March 30, 2016, submitted to Justice Ginsburg.|
|Feb 16 2016||Application (15A858) granted by Justice Ginsburg extending the time to file until March 30, 2016.|
|Mar 22 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 21, 2016)|
|Apr 11 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 23, 2016.|
|May 17 2016||Letter dated May 17, 2016, from the Solicitor General received notifying the Court of an error in the petition appendix.|
|May 23 2016||Brief of respondent Luis Ramon Morales-Santana in opposition filed.|
|Jun 7 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 23, 2016.|
|Jun 7 2016||Reply of petitioner Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 27 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 27, 2016.|
|Jun 28 2016||Petition GRANTED.|
|Aug 1 2016||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General.|
|Aug 4 2016||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 19, 2016.|
|Aug 4 2016||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 26, 2016.|
|Aug 19 2016||Brief of petitioner Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General filed.|
|Sep 2 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT On Wednesday, November 9, 2016|
|Sep 7 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.|
|Sep 9 2016||Record has been requested from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.|
|Sep 15 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent.|
|Sep 15 2016||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit is electronic.|
|Sep 26 2016||Brief of respondent Luis Ramon Morales-Santana filed.|
|Sep 28 2016||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 30 2016||Brief amici curiae of The American Civil Liberties Union, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 3 2016||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Oct 3 2016||Brief amici curiae of Constitutional Law, Federal Courts, Citizenship, and Remedies Scholars filed. (Distributed).|
|Oct 3 2016||Brief amici curiae of Professors of History, Political Science, and Law filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 3 2016||Brief amici curiae of Equality Now, et al. filed.|
|Oct 3 2016||Brief amici curiae of The National Immigrant Justice Center, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 3 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Population and Family Scholars filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 3 2016||Brief amici curiae of Scholars on Statelessness filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2016||Reply of petitioner Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 9 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Stephen A. Broome, Los Angeles, Cal.|
|Nov 15 2016||Record received from the Board of Immigration Appeals is electronic.|
|Nov 16 2016||Letter from counsel for petitioner received and distributed.|
|Jun 12 2017||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and case REMANDED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part, in which Alito, J., joined. Gorsuch, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.|
|Jul 14 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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 ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
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.