|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1023||M.D.N.C.||Not Argued||Jun 5, 2017||n/a||Per Curiam||OT 2016|
Holding: In ordering special elections and suspending residency requirements in the state constitution after holding that 28 majority-black districts drawn by the North Carolina General Assembly were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders, the district court did not adequately grapple with the case-specific interests -- such as the severity and nature of the particular constitutional violation, the extent of the likely disruption to the ordinary processes of governance if early elections are imposed, and the need to act with proper judicial restraint when intruding on state sovereignty -- on both sides of the remedial question.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded in a per curiam opinion on June 5, 2017.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 30 2016||Application (16A646) for a stay of remedial order pending resolution of direct appeal in this Court, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Jan 3 2017||Response Requested due no later than noon on January 9, 2017|
|Jan 9 2017||Response to application from respondent Sandra Little Covington, et al. filed.|
|Jan 10 2017||Reply of applicant North Carolina, et al., Appellants filed.|
|Jan 10 2017||Application (16A646) referred to the Court.|
|Jan 10 2017||Application (16A646) granted by the Court. The application for stay of the order of the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, case No. 1:15-CV-399, entered on November 29, 2016, presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is granted, pending the timely filing of a statement as to jurisdiction. Should such statement be timely filed, this order shall remain in effect pending this Courts action on the appeal. If the judgment should be affirmed, or the appeal dismissed, this stay shall expire automatically. In the event jurisdiction is noted or postponed, this order will remain in effect pending the sending down of the judgment of this Court.|
|Feb 21 2017||Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due March 27, 2017)|
|Feb 28 2017||Motion to affirm filed by appellees Sandra Little Covington, et al.|
|Mar 14 2017||Opposition to motion to affirm of appellants North Carolina, et al., Appellants filed.|
|Mar 15 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 31, 2017.|
|May 22 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 25, 2017.|
|May 24 2017||Supplemental brief of appellants North Carolina, et al., Appellants filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|May 30 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 1, 2017.|
|May 31 2017||Response to supplemental brief from appellees Sandra Little Covington, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Jun 5 2017||The judgment is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion)|
|Jun 6 2017||Application (16A1203) for issuance of the judgment forthwith, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Jun 7 2017||Response to application (16A1203) requested by The Chief Justice, due Tuesday, June 13, 2017, by 3 p.m. ET.|
|Jun 13 2017||Response to application from Philip E. Berger, et al. filed.|
|Jun 13 2017||Response to application from North Carolina, et al. filed.|
|Jun 14 2017||Reply of Sandra Little Covington, et al. filed.|
|Jun 15 2017||Application (16A1203) referred to the Court.|
|Jun 15 2017||Application (16A1203) denied by the Court.|
|Jun 30 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
FWOTSC. You figure that one out.*
h/t to @marinklevy for the story and the always-entertaining threads.
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).