|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-349||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2015|
Issue: (1) Whether a defendant is subject to suit under the Alien Tort Statute for aiding and abetting another person's alleged violation of the law of nations based on allegations that the defendant intended to pursue a legitimate business objective while knowing (but not intending) that the objective could be advanced by the other person's violation of international law; (2) whether the “focus” test of Morrison v. National Australian Bank, Ltd. governs whether a proposed application of the Alien Tort Statute would be impermissibly extraterritorial under Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.; and (3) whether there is a well-defined international-law consensus that corporations are subject to liability for violations of the law of nations.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jul 16 2015||Application (15A83) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 4, 2015 to September 18, 2015, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Jul 22 2015||Application (15A83) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until September 18, 2015.|
|Sep 18 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 21, 2015)|
|Oct 17 2015||Waiver of right of respondents John Doe I, et al. to respond filed.|
|Oct 21 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Grocery Manufacturers Association filed.|
|Oct 21 2015||Brief amici curiae of National Confectioners Association, et al. filed.|
|Oct 21 2015||Brief amici curiae of Washington Legal Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Oct 21 2015||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Oct 28 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 13, 2015.|
|Nov 4 2015||Response Requested . (Due December 4, 2015)|
|Dec 4 2015||Brief of respondents John Doe I, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 21 2015||Reply of petitioners Nestle U.S.A., Inc., et al. filed.|
|Dec 22 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 8, 2016.|
|Jan 11 2016||Petition DENIED.|
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.