|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-282||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2019|
Issues: (1) Whether an agency exercising its policy-making authority under Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council may apply a new rule retroactively to a noncitizen who pleaded guilty in reliance on its previous rule; and (2) whether the phrase “crime involving moral turpitude” is void for vagueness.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 10 2019||Application (18A1304) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 30, 2019 to August 29, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Jun 10 2019||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 this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.|
|Jun 13 2019||Application (18A1304) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until August 29, 2019.|
|Aug 29 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 3, 2019)|
|Sep 25 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 3, 2019 to November 4, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Sep 25 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 4, 2019.|
|Oct 25 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 4, 2019 to December 4, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 25 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 4, 2019.|
|Nov 29 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 4, 2019 to January 9, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 29 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 9, 2019.|
|Jan 09 2020||Brief of respondent William P. Barr, Attorney General in opposition filed.|
|Jan 27 2020||Reply of petitioner Manuel Olivas-Motta filed.|
|Jan 29 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.|
|Feb 24 2020||Petition DENIED.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.