|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-271||9th Cir.||Jan 12, 2015||Apr 21, 2015||7-2||Breyer||OT 2014|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioners in this case.
Holding: State antitrust law claims are allowed to proceed against gas pipelines for alleged manipulation of market price indices, notwithstanding federal regulation of pipelines under the Natural Gas Act.
Judgment: Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on April 21, 2015. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgement. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 10 2013||Application (12A1194) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 9, 2013 to September 6, 2013, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Jun 20 2013||Application (12A1194) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until August 24, 2013.|
|Aug 26 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 27, 2013)|
|Sep 13 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including October 28, 2013, for all respondents.|
|Sep 27 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Sep 27 2013||Brief amici curiae of Electric Power Supply Association, et al. filed.|
|Sep 27 2013||Brief amicus curiae of American Gas Association filed.|
|Sep 27 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Gas Processors Association filed.|
|Oct 25 2013||Brief of respondents Learjet, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.|
|Oct 25 2013||Brief of respondents Arandell Corp. et al. (Wisconsin Respondents) in opposition filed.|
|Nov 12 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 26, 2013.|
|Nov 12 2013||Reply of petitioners Oneok, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 2 2013||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
|May 27 2014||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jun 9 2014||Supplemental brief of petitioners Oneok, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Jun 10 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2014.|
|Jun 12 2014||Supplemental brief of respondents Learjet, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 24 2014||Justice Alito is no longer recused in this case.|
|Jun 30 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 30, 2014.|
|Jul 1 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 17 2014||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 18, 2014.|
|Jul 17 2014||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including November 21, 2014.|
|Sep 10 2014||Consent from the parties (petitioners, respondents Learjet and Arandell Corp., et al.) to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or neither party received.|
|Sep 18 2014||Joint appendix filed (2 volumes). (Statement of costs filed)|
|Sep 18 2014||Brief of petitioners ONEOK, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Sep 25 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Sep 25 2014||Brief amici curiae of Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, et al. filed.|
|Sep 25 2014||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.|
|Sep 25 2014||Brief amici curiae of Noble Americas Energy Solutions, et al. filed.|
|Nov 21 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, January 12, 2015.|
|Nov 21 2014||Brief of respondents Learjet, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Nov 21 2014||Brief of Wisconsin respondents filed.|
|Nov 26 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Nov 26 2014||Brief amici curiae of Kansas, et al. filed.|
|Nov 26 2014||Brief amicus curiae of American Antitrust Institute filed.|
|Nov 26 2014||Motion of Kansas, et al for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Dec 2 2014||CIRCULATED.|
|Dec 2 2014||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Dec 2 2014||Record received from U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit, the record is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Dec 2 2014||Record recived from U.S.D.C. District of Nevada, the record is electroinic and located on PACER.|
|Dec 15 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Dec 15 2014||Motion of Kansas, et al. for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Dec 22 2014||Reply of petitioners ONEOK, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2015||Argued. For petitioners: Neal K. Katyal, Washington, D. C.; and Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal.; and Stephen R. McAllister, Solicitor General, Topeka, Kan. (for Kansas, et al., as amici curiae.)|
|Apr 21 2015||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined, and in which Thomas, J., joined as to all but Part I-A. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., joined.|
|May 26 2015||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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.