|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-126||6th Cir.||May 28, 2013||5-4||Ginsburg||OT 2012|
Holding: Actual innocence, if proved, serves as a gateway through which a petitioner may pass whether the impediment to consideration of the merits of a constitutional claim is a procedural bar, as it was in Schlup v. Delo and House v. Bell, or expiration of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act statute of limitations, as in this case.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on May 28, 2013. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, in which the Chief Justice and Justice Thomas joined and in which Justice Alito joined as to Parts I, II, and III.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jul 25 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 27, 2012)|
|Aug 9 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including September 26, 2012.|
|Aug 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of Alabama, et al. filed.|
|Sep 26 2012||Brief of respondent Floyd Perkins in opposition filed.|
|Oct 9 2012||Reply of petitioner Greg McQuiggin, Warden filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 10 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 26, 2012.|
|Oct 29 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Dec 13 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Dec 13 2012||Brief of petitioner Greg McQuiggin, Warden filed.|
|Dec 18 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT Monday, February 25, 2013.|
|Dec 20 2012||Brief amici curiae of Alabama, et al. filed.|
|Dec 21 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 18, 2013.|
|Jan 4 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Jan 8 2013||Record from the U.S.C.A. for 6th Circuit is electronic.|
|Jan 15 2013||Record from the U.S.D.C. for Western District of Michigan is electronic.|
|Jan 18 2013||Brief of respondent Floyd Perkins filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 25 2013||Brief amicus curiae of The Innocence Network filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 25 2013||Brief amici curiae of former and current law enforcement officials filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 15 2013||Reply of petitioner Greg McQuiggin, Warden filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 25 2013||Argued. For petitioner: John J. Bursch, Michigan Solicitor General, Lansing, Mich. For respondent: Chad A. Readler, Columbus, Ohio.|
|May 28 2013||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, J., joined, and in which Alito, J., joined as to Parts I, II, and III.|
|Jul 1 2013||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.