Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
11-1425 | Mo. | Jan 9, 2013 | Apr 17, 2013 | 5-4 | Sotomayor | OT 2012 |
Holding: In drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not constitute an exigency in every case sufficient to justify conducting a blood test without a warrant.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on April 17, 2013. Justice Sotomayor announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II-A, II-B, and IV, in which Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Kagan joined, and an opinion with respect to Parts II-C and III, in which Justice Scalia, Justice Ginsburg and Justice Kagan joined. Justice Kennedy filed an opinion concurring in part. Chief Justice Roberts filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Justice Breyer and Justice Alito joined. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
May 22 2012 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 25, 2012) |
Jun 8 2012 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including July 25, 2012. |
Jul 25 2012 | Brief of respondent Tyler G. McNeely in opposition filed. |
Aug 8 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012. |
Aug 14 2012 | Reply of petitioner Missouri filed. (Distributed) |
Sep 25 2012 | Petition GRANTED. |
Oct 31 2012 | SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, January 9, 2013 |
Nov 5 2012 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent. |
Nov 9 2012 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received) |
Nov 9 2012 | Brief of petitioner Missouri filed. |
Nov 13 2012 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner. |
Nov 16 2012 | CIRCULATED. |
Nov 16 2012 | Brief amicus curiae of Mothers Against Drunk Driving filed. (Distributed) |
Nov 16 2012 | Brief amici curiae of National District Attorneys Association, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
Nov 16 2012 | Brief amici curiae of Delaware, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
Nov 16 2012 | Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed) |
Dec 10 2012 | Brief of respondent Tyler G. McNeely filed. (Distributed) |
Dec 10 2012 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. |
Dec 14 2012 | Brief amicus curiae of Rutherford Institute filed. (Distributed) |
Dec 17 2012 | Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed. (Distributed) |
Dec 17 2012 | Brief amici curiae of National College for DUI Defense, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
Dec 20 2012 | Record received from The Supreme Court State of Missouri. (1 Box) |
Jan 2 2013 | Reply of petitioner Missouri filed. (Distributed) |
Jan 4 2013 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. |
Jan 9 2013 | Argued. For petitioner: John N. Koester, Jr., Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Jackson, Mo.; and Nicole A. Saharsky, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Steven R. Shapiro, New York, N. Y. |
Apr 17 2013 | Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Sotomayor, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II-A, II-B, and IV, in which Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Kagan, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Parts II-C and III, in which Scalia, Ginsburg, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed an opinion concurring in part. Roberts, C. J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Breyer and Alito, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion. |
May 20 2013 | MANDATE ISSUED. |
Jul 5 2013 | Record returned to Supreme Court of Missouri. |
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
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: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. Weβre still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
www.scotusblog.com
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _π©ββοΈπ©ββοΈπ©ββοΈπ¨ββοΈπ¨ββοΈπ¨ββοΈπ¨ββοΈπ¨ββοΈπ¨ββοΈ_ Register here β‘οΈ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
Senator Markey (D-Ma) is delivering remarks right now in front of the Supreme Court introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the court to 13 justices. Heβs flanked by Chairman of House Judiciary, Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and Hank Johnson (D-Ga).
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...
www.scotusblog.com
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.