|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-863||6th Cir.||Nov 9, 2020||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2020|
Issue: Whether, to serve notice in accordance with 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a) and trigger the stop-time rule, the government must serve a specific document that includes all the information identified in Section 1229(a), or whether the government can serve that information over the course of as many documents and as much time as it chooses.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 09 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 10, 2020)|
|Jan 09 2020||Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in ths case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing systesm.|
|Feb 05 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 10, 2020 to March 11, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Feb 05 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 11, 2020.|
|Mar 05 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 11, 2020 to April 10, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including April 10, 2020.|
|Apr 10 2020||Brief of respondent William P. Barr, Attorney General in opposition filed.|
|Apr 20 2020||Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from April 28, 2020 to May 12, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 21 2020||Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari until May 12, 2020, granted.|
|May 01 2020||Letter of May 1, 2020 from the Solicitor General filed.|
|May 11 2020||Reply of petitioner Agusto Niz-Chavez filed.|
|May 12 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/28/2020.|
|May 20 2020||Letter of May 20, 2020 from counsel for petitioner filed.|
|Jun 01 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.|
|Jun 08 2020||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 08 2020||As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.|
|Jul 13 2020||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jul 20 2020||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 6, 2020. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 21, 2020.|
|Aug 06 2020||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Aug 06 2020||Brief of petitioner Agusto Niz-Chavez filed.|
|Aug 13 2020||Brief amici curiae of Thirty-Three Former Immigration Judges and Members of the Board of Immigration Appeals filed.|
|Aug 13 2020||Brief amicus curiae of National Immigrant Justice Center filed.|
|Aug 13 2020||Brief amici curiae of American Immigration Lawyers Association, The American Immigration Council, Legal Services Providers filed.|
|Aug 19 2020||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, November 9, 2020.|
|Aug 31 2020||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.|
|Sep 01 2020||Record of the U.S.C.A.6th Circuit electronically received.|
|Sep 02 2020||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 16 2020||Motion for an extension of time to file respondent's brief on the merits filed.|
|Sep 18 2020||Motion to extend the time to file respondent's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including September 25, 2020.|
|Sep 25 2020||Brief of respondent William P. Barr, Attorney General filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 02 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Immigration Reform Law Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2020||Reply of petitioner Agusto Niz-Chavez filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 09 2020||Argued. For petitioner: David Zimmer, Boston, Mass. For respondent: Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
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 ...
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
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.