|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1435||8th Cir.||Feb 28, 2018||Jun 14, 2018||7-2||Roberts||OT 2017|
Holding: Minnesota’s ban on political apparel at polling places violates the First Amendment’s free speech clause.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 7-2, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on June 14, 2018. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 30 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 3, 2017)|
|May 30 2017||Letter pursuant to Rule 12.6 from counsel for petitioners received.|
|Jun 08 2017||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioners.|
|Jun 12 2017||Waiver of right of respondent Steve Simon, in his official capacity as Minnesota Secretary of State to respond filed.|
|Jun 15 2017||Waiver of right of respondent Joe Mansky, et al. to respond filed.|
|Jul 03 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Cato Institute, et al.|
|Jul 03 2017||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Center for Competitive Politics.|
|Jul 03 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by The American Civil Rights Union, et al.|
|Jul 19 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 25, 2017.|
|Aug 04 2017||Response Requested. (Due September 5, 2017)|
|Sep 01 2017||Brief of respondents Joe Mansky, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Sep 14 2017||Reply of petitioners Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al. filed.|
|Sep 20 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2017.|
|Oct 10 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/13/2017.|
|Oct 23 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2017.|
|Oct 30 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/3/2017.|
|Nov 06 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/9/2017.|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Cato Institute, et al. GRANTED.|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by The American Civil Rights Union, et al. GRANTED.|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Center fo Competitive Politics GRANTED.|
|Nov 13 2017||Petition GRANTED.|
|Nov 27 2017||Motion for an extension of time filed.|
|Nov 27 2017||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioners, Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al.|
|Nov 29 2017||Motion to extend the time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including January 5, 2018.|
|Dec 07 2017||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Joe Mansky, et al.|
|Dec 20 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, February 28, 2018|
|Jan 05 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Jan 05 2018||Brief of petitioners Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al. filed.|
|Jan 05 2018||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Jan 10 2018||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit.|
|Jan 10 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Goldwater Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2018||Brief amicus curiae of James Madison Center for Free Speech, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of Justice and Freedom Fund filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 11 2018||Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of Southeastern Legal Foundation, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Free Speech filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of The American Civil Rights Union, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union; American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 17 2018||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit. (1 Box).|
|Feb 05 2018||Brief of respondents Joe Mansky, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, The League of Women Voters of the United States and The League of Women Voters Minnesota filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of States of Tennessee, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Texas, and Utah filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 12 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Campaign Legal Center filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, International City/County Management Association, and International Municipal Lawyers Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2018||Reply of petitioners Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Argued. For petitioners: J. David Breemer, Sacramento, Cal. For respondents: Daniel Rogan, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, Minneapolis, Minn.|
|Jun 14 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Alito, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, J., joined.|
|Jul 16 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 21 2018||Record from the U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit has been returned.|
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.