|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-587||9th Cir.||Oct 1, 2018||Nov 6, 2018||8-0||Ginsburg||OT 2018|
Holding: State and local governments are covered employers under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 regardless of the number of employees they have.
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on November 6, 2018. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 25 2017||Application (17A226) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 17, 2017 to October 18, 2017, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Aug 30 2017||Application (17A226) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until October 18, 2017.|
|Oct 18 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 20, 2017)|
|Nov 08 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 18, 2017.|
|Dec 18 2017||Brief of respondents John Guido, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jan 02 2018||Reply of petitioner Mount Lemmon Fire District filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 03 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/19/2018.|
|Feb 05 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.|
|Feb 20 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2018.|
|Feb 26 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Mar 23 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Mount Lemmon Fire District.|
|Mar 23 2018||Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Mar 26 2018||Joint motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits is granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including May 7, 2018. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including July 5, 2018.|
|Apr 06 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, John Guido, et al.|
|Apr 16 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|May 04 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Mount Lemmon Fire District.|
|May 07 2018||Brief of petitioner Mount Lemmon Fire District filed.|
|May 14 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Conference of State Legislatures, et al. filed.|
|Jul 05 2018||Brief of respondents John Guido, et al. filed.|
|Jul 09 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT On Monday, October 1, 2018|
|Jul 12 2018||Brief amici curiae of AARP, AARP Foundation and NELA filed.|
|Jul 12 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jul 12 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Aug 03 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Aug 06 2018||Reply of petitioner Mount Lemmon Fire District filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 07 2018||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Aug 24 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Aug 30 2018||Record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Oct 01 2018||Argued. For petitioner: E. Joshua Rosenkranz, New York, N. Y. For respondents: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal.; and Jonathan C. Bond, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Nov 06 2018||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Kavanaugh, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Dec 10 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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 ...
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! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ 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. He’s 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...
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.