|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.|
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:
Cast your vote below!
The “great chief” and the “super chief”: A final showdown in Supreme Court March Madness - SCOTUSblog
Forget Ali vs. Frazier, Celtics vs. Lakers, or Evert vs. Navratilova. It’s time for Marshall vs. Warren. After...
In yet another Friday night shadow docket order, a divided Supreme Court sides with challengers to California’s COVID-related restrictions. Brief per curiam opinion and dissent from Justice Kagan: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf
By vote of 5-4, #SCOTUS blocks California's COVID-related restrictions on in-home prayer meetings and worship. Opinion & Kagan's dissent are here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf
President Biden will sign an executive order authorizing a commission to study Supreme Court reform. The commission will review “the length of service and turnover of justices on the court; the membership and size of the court” among other topics.
President Biden to Sign Executive Order Creating the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States | The White House
President Biden will today issue an executive order forming the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States, comprised of a
The Supreme Court will hear April and May oral arguments remotely but with a live audio feed.
#SCOTUS confirms that "[i]n keeping with public health guidance in response to COVID-19," it will hear oral arguments in April and on May 4 remotely, as it has for the other argument sessions this term. Press release here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Media-Advisory-Teleconference-Arguments.pdf
In a Monday evening shadow-docket filing, Tennessee asks the Supreme Court to reinstate a state law that imposes a 48-hour waiting period for patients to abortions. A federal judge struck down the waiting period as unconstitutional. @AHoweBlogger explains:
Tennessee asks court to restore waiting period for abortions - SCOTUSblog
Tennessee filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court on Monday, asking the justices for permission to enforce...
BREAKING: In major copyright battle between tech giants, SCOTUS sides w/ Google over Oracle, finding that Google didnt commit copyright infringement when it reused lines of code in its Android operating system. The code came from Oracle's JAVA SE platform. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf
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.