|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1144||2nd Cir.||Dec 6, 2017||Mar 21, 2018||7-2||Breyer||OT 2017|
Holding: To convict a defendant under 26 U. S. C. §7212(a) -- which forbids “corruptly or by force or threats of force . . . obstruct[ing] or imped[ing], or endeavor[ing] to obstruct or impede, the due administration of [the Internal Revenue Code]” -- the federal government must prove the defendant was aware of a pending tax-related proceeding, such as a particular investigation or audit, or could reasonably foresee that such a proceeding would commence.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on March 21, 2018. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 21 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 21, 2017)|
|Apr 12 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 22, 2017.|
|Apr 21 2017||Brief amicus curiae of The American College of Tax Counsel filed.|
|Apr 21 2017||Brief amici curiae of Cause of Action Institute, at el. filed.|
|May 22 2017||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|May 25 2017||Letter of May 25, 2017, with supplemental authority from the Acting Solicitor General received.|
|Jun 05 2017||Reply of petitioner Carl J. Marinello, II filed.|
|Jun 06 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 22, 2017.|
|Jun 26 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2017.|
|Jun 27 2017||Petition GRANTED.|
|Aug 03 2017||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 1, 2017.|
|Aug 03 2017||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 23, 2017.|
|Aug 23 2017||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Carl J. Marinello, II.|
|Sep 01 2017||Brief of petitioner Carl J. Marinello, II filed.|
|Sep 08 2017||Brief amicus curiae of American College of Tax Counsel filed.|
|Sep 08 2017||Brief amicus curiae of New York Council of Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Sep 08 2017||Brief amici curiae of Cause of Action Institute and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Sep 08 2017||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Sep 25 2017||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Oct 06 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, December 5, 2017|
|Oct 18 2017||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.|
|Oct 19 2017||Record received from the U.S.C.A. is electronic.|
|Oct 20 2017||CIRCULATED|
|Oct 23 2017||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 15 2017||This case is removed from the oral argument calendar for Tuesday, December 5, 2017, and has been SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, December 6, 2017.|
|Nov 22 2017||Reply of petitioner Carl J. Marinello, II filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 06 2017||Argued. For petitioner: Matthew S. Hellman, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Robert A. Parker, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Mar 21 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Alito, J., joined.|
|Apr 23 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
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.
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.