|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-1108||5th Cir.||Not Argued||Nov 2, 2020||7-1||Per Curiam||OT 2020|
Holding: Under the unusual circumstances of this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit should not have ventured into such an uncertain area of state tort law without first using state certification procedures to seek guidance from the Louisiana Supreme Court.
Judgment: Granted, vacated and remanded in a per curiam opinion on November 2, 2020. Justice Thomas dissented. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 05 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 9, 2020)|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief of respondent Black Lives Matter Global Network, Inc. in support filed.|
|Apr 09 2020||Amicus brief of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People not accepted for filing. (April 15, 2020)|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief amicus curiae of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People filed.|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief amici curiae of Floyd Abrams, et al. filed.|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Free Speech filed.|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Howard University Human and Civil Rights Clinic filed.|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief amici curiae of First Amendment Scholars filed.|
|Apr 09 2020||Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed.|
|Apr 13 2020||Waiver of right of respondent John Doe to respond filed.|
|Apr 28 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2020.|
|May 11 2020||Response Requested. (Due June 10, 2020)|
|May 29 2020||Brief of respondent John Doe in opposition filed.|
|Jun 17 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.|
|Jun 19 2020||Reply of petitioner DeRay Mckesson filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 05 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.|
|Oct 13 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/16/2020.|
|Oct 26 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/30/2020.|
|Nov 02 2020||Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Justice Thomas dissents. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion)|
|Dec 04 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...
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.