|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.|
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
Congratulations to Gail Curley, the new Marshal of the Supreme Court. The Marshal supervises the Court's police, cries in the Court with the familiar "Oyez," and (somewhat oddly) is responsible for paying the Justices' salaries. https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1389212773108920323
JUST IN: If you’re the kind of person always expecting the Marshal of the Supreme Court to make an arrest, there’s a new sheriff in town #SCOTUS
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.