|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1423||C.A.A.F.||Jan 16, 2018||Jun 22, 2018||7-2||Kagan||OT 2017|
Holding: Military judge Colonel Martin Mitchell’s simultaneous service on an Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Military Commission Review violated neither 10 U. S. C. §973(b)(2)(A) nor the appointments clause of the Constitution.
Judgment: Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 22, 2018. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 21 2017||Application (16A1034) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 10, 2017 to June 9, 2017, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Apr 26 2017||Application (16A1034) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until June 9, 2017.|
|May 19 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 29, 2017)|
|Jun 26 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including July 31, 2017.|
|Jul 27 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including August 18, 2017.|
|Aug 18 2017||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Aug 30 2017||Reply of petitioner Keanu D. W. Ortiz filed.|
|Sep 06 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/25/2017.|
|Sep 28 2017||Petition GRANTED, and the petitions for writs of certiorari in Nos. 16-961 and 16-1017 are granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. In addition to the questions presented by the petitions, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether this Court has jurisdiction to review the cases in Nos. 16-961 and 16-1017 under 28 U. S. C. § 1259(3).|
|Nov 07 2017||Joint appendix filed. VIDED. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Nov 07 2017||Brief of petitioners filed. VIDED.|
|Nov 14 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Aditya Bamzai in support of neither party filed. VIDED.|
|Nov 17 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, January 16, 2018. VIDED|
|Nov 22 2017||CIRCULATED.|
|Dec 07 2017||Brief of respondent United States filed. VIDED.|
|Dec 14 2017||Motion of Aditya Bamzai for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. VIDED.|
|Jan 05 2018||Motion of Professor Aditya Bamzai for enlargement of time for oral argument, for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED, and the time is divided as follows: 30 minutes for petitioners, 10 minutes for Professor Aditya Bamzai, and 30 minutes for respondent. VIDED|
|Jan 05 2018||Reply of petitioner Keanu D. W. Ortiz filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Jan 09 2018||Record received from U.S.C.A. for the Armed Forces. (1 Box)|
|Jan 10 2018||Letter of respondent United States filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Jan 16 2018||Argued. For petitioners: Stephen I. Vladeck, Austin, Tex. For Professor Aditya Bamzai as amicus curiae: Aditya Bamzai, Charlottesville, VA. For respondent: Brian H. Fletcher, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.|
|Jan 16 2018||Record received from the U.S.C.A. for the Armed Forces. (1 Box)|
|Jun 22 2018||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch, J., joined.|
|Jul 24 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 07 2018||The records received on January 9 and 16, 2018 from the U.S.C.A. for the Armed Forces has been returned.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
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 ...
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.