|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-935||6th Cir.||Dec 11, 2019||Feb 25, 2020||9-0||Ginsburg||OT 2019|
Holding: A child’s habitual residence under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction depends on the totality of the circumstances specific to the case, not on categorical requirements such as an actual agreement between the parents.
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on February 25, 2020. Justice Thomas joined as to Parts I, III and IV, and filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 15 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 19, 2019)|
|Feb 11 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 19, 2019 to March 21, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Feb 11 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 21, 2019.|
|Feb 19 2019||Motion of Sanctuary for Families, National Network to End Domestic Violence, and Pathways to Safety International for leave to file amicus brief not accepted for filing. (February 21, 2019) (Corrected version submitted)|
|Feb 19 2019||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Sanctuary for Families, et al.|
|Mar 12 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 21, 2019 to April 5, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 13 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including April 5, 2019.|
|Apr 02 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 5, 2019 to April 19, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 02 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including April 19, 2019.|
|Apr 19 2019||Brief of respondent Domenico Taglieri in opposition filed.|
|May 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.|
|May 07 2019||Reply of petitioner Michelle Monasky filed. (Distributed)|
|May 28 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2019.|
|Jun 03 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/6/2019.|
|Jun 10 2019||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Sanctuary for Families, et al. GRANTED.|
|Jun 10 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 08 2019||Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jul 09 2019||Joint motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 15, 2019. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 7, 2019.|
|Aug 15 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Michelle Monasky.|
|Aug 15 2019||Brief of petitioner Michelle Monasky filed.|
|Aug 15 2019||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed).|
|Aug 21 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Reunite International Child Abduction Centre in support of neither party filed.|
|Aug 22 2019||Brief amici curiae of Sanctuary for Families, et al. filed.|
|Aug 22 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States in support of neither party filed.|
|Aug 22 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Frederick K. Cox International Law Center filed.|
|Sep 13 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, December 11, 2019.|
|Oct 07 2019||Brief of respondent Domenico Taglieri filed.|
|Oct 11 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Oct 11 2019||Brief amicus curiae of International Academy of Family Lawyers filed.|
|Oct 14 2019||Brief amicus curiae of American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers filed.|
|Oct 23 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.|
|Oct 23 2019||The record from the U.S.C..A. 6th Circuit is electronic and filed.|
|Oct 25 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Nov 04 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Nov 06 2019||Reply of petitioner Michelle Monasky filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 11 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Amir C. Tayrani, Washington, D. C. For United States, as amicus curiae: Sopan Joshi, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Andrew J. Pincus, Washington, D. C.|
|Feb 25 2020||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined, and in which Thomas, J., joined as to Parts I, III, and IV. Thomas, J., and Alito, J., filed opinions concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.|
|Mar 30 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
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. We’re 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 ...
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.