Issue: (1) Whether the Court will grant Nebraska and Oklahoma leave to file an original action to seek a declaratory judgment stating that Sections 16(4) and (5) of Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution are preempted by federal law, and therefore unconstitutional and unenforceable under the Supremacy Clause, Article VI of the U.S. Constitution; (2) whether Colorado should be enjoined from any and all application and implementation of Sections 16(4) and (5) of Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution; (3) whether Colorado should be enjoined from any and all application and implementation of statutes or regulations promulgated pursuant to Sections 16(4) and (5) of Article XVIII of the Colorado Constitution; and (4) whether Colorado should be ordered to pay the plaintiff states’ costs and expenses associated with this legal action, including attorneys’ fees. CVSG: 12/18/2015.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 18 2014||Motion for leave to file a bill of complaint filed.|
|Feb 10 2015||Order extending time to file response to the bill of complaint to and including March 27, 2015|
|Feb 19 2015||Brief amici curiae of All Nine Former Administrators of Drug Enforcement filed.|
|Mar 27 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Washington and Oregon filed.|
|Mar 27 2015||Brief of respondent Colorado in opposition filed.|
|Apr 03 2015||Reply of plaintiffs Nebraska and Oklahoma filed.|
|Apr 15 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 1, 2015.|
|May 04 2015||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|Dec 16 2015||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jan 05 2016||Supplemental brief of petitioners Nebraska and Oklahoma filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 06 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 22, 2016.|
|Feb 08 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 19, 2016.|
|Feb 29 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 4, 2016.|
|Mar 14 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 18, 2016.|
|Mar 21 2016||Motion for leave to file a bill of complaint DENIED. Justice Thomas with whom Justice Alito joins, dissenting from the denial of motion for leave to file complaint. (Detached Opinion)|
A surprising stat at this point in the term: Both Kagan and Breyer have been in the majority slightly more often than Alito.
Kavanaugh continues to have the highest rate (as he has for most of the term). Sotomayor has the lowest.
Still 15 cases left. So this could all change.
The first two pieces in our symposium on yesterday's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia are up. First, @JimOleske dissects the decision in light of the court's shadow-docket ruling in Tandon v. Newsom, which took a very different approach to free exercise.
Fulton quiets Tandon’s thunder: A free exercise puzzle - SCOTUSblog
This article is the first entry in a symposium on the court’s decision in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. ...
Number of pages written by each justice in the five decisions handed down this week (majority opinions, concurrences, and dissents all included):
While today's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia is a win for a Catholic group seeking to participate in the city's foster program, it stops short of the broad endorsement of religious freedom the challengers had hoped for. Here's @AHoweBlogger's analysis:
Court holds that city’s refusal to make referrals to faith-based agency violates Constitution - SCOTUSblog
In a clash between religious freedom and public policies that protect LGBTQ people, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday...
Now do we say that Sonia Sotomayor and the other liberals supported child slavery by all voting for Nestle today? Of course not. And Nestle’s lawyers like @Neal_katyal obviously don’t either. The cheap attacks on the court and thoughtful lawyers did not age well. -tg
The claim @nealkatyal was defending slavery is flat wrong & libelous. Here is what he actually said, which is the reverse: child slavery is abhorrent, criminal, horrific. Remember in a pending case he can't comment, so read what he really said in full.
Tired from this morning's momentous opinions? Get ready to do it all again next week -- three times. The court just revealed that next Monday, Wednesday and Friday will all be opinion days.
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.