|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-536||D.D.C||Oct 8, 2013||Apr 2, 2014||5-4||Roberts||OT 2013|
Holding: Because aggregate limits restricting how much money a donor may contribute to candidates for federal office, political parties, and political action committees do not further the government’s interest in preventing quid pro quo corruption or the appearance of such corruption, while at the same time seriously restricting participation in the democratic process, they are invalid under the First Amendment.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on April 2, 2014. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion in which Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 26 2012||Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due December 3, 2012)|
|Nov 14 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 2, 2013.|
|Jan 2 2013||Motion to dismiss or affirm filed by appellee Federal Election Commission.|
|Jan 14 2013||Opposition to motion to dismiss or affirm of appellants Shaun McCutcheon, et al., Appellants filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 16 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 15, 2013.|
|Feb 19 2013||PROBABLE JURISDICTION NOTED.|
|Mar 1 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from the Solicitor General.|
|Mar 7 2013||The time to file the joint appendix and appellants' brief on the merits is extended to and including May 6, 2013.|
|Mar 11 2013||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by appellants Shaun McCutcheon, et al., Appellants.|
|Apr 1 2013||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Apr 22 2013||The time to file appellee's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 18, 2013.|
|May 6 2013||Brief of appellant Republican National Committee filed.|
|May 6 2013||Brief of appellant Shaun McCutcheon|
|May 8 2013||Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Rights Union filed.|
|May 10 2013||Brief amici curiae of National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amici curiae of Downsize DC Foundation, et al. filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Senator Mitch McConnell filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Competitive Politics filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Committee for Justice filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Justice filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amici curiae of Tea Party Leadership Fund, et al. filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Cause of Action Institute filed.|
|May 13 2013||Brief amici curiae of Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression and the Media Institute filed.|
|Jul 18 2013||Brief of appellee Federal Election Commission filed.|
|Jul 22 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Jul 23 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 8, 2013.|
|Jul 24 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Brennan Center for Justice at N.Y.U. School of Law filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 24 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Americans for Campaign Reform filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amici curiae of Representatives Chris Van Hollen and David Price filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Lawrence Lessig filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amici curiae of Democratic Members of the United States House of Representatives filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amici curiae of The Campaign Legal Center, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 25 2013||Motion of Senator Mitch McConnell for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amici curiae of Communications Workers of America, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amici curiae of National Education Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 5 2013||Record from U.S.D.C. for the District of Columbia is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Aug 16 2013||Reply of appellant Republican National Committee filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 19 2013||Reply of appellant Shaun McCutcheon filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 30 2013||Motion of Senator Mitch McConnell for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 8 2013||Argued. For appellants: Erin E. Murphy, Washington, D. C.; and Bobby R. Burchfield, Washington, D. C. (for Senator Mitch McConnell, as amicus curiae.) For appellee: Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Apr 2 2014||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined.|
|May 5 2014||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
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.
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.