|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Issue: Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a state from invalidating an arbitration agreement as substantively unconscionable on the ground that it provides procedural protections akin to civil litigation, rather than to the streamlined administrative proceeding that would be available under state law in the absence of the agreement.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 04 2019||Application (19A487) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 27, 2019 to January 13, 2020, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Nov 04 2019||Application (19A487) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until January 13, 2020.|
|Jan 13 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 14, 2020)|
|Jan 17 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, OTO, L.L.C.|
|Jan 23 2020||Waiver of right of respondent Ken Kho to respond filed.|
|Jan 23 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Ken Kho.|
|Feb 13 2020||Brief amici curiae of California New Car Dealers Association filed.|
|Feb 13 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Atlantic Legal Foundation filed.|
|Feb 14 2020||Brief amicus curiae of The Cato Institute filed.|
|Feb 14 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.|
|Feb 14 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Civil Justice Association of California filed.|
|Feb 26 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2020.|
|Feb 27 2020||Response Requested. (Due March 30, 2020)|
|Mar 11 2020||Motion of respondent Julia A. Su, California Labor Commissioner to extend the time to file a response from March 30, 2020 to April 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 11 2020||Motion of respondent Ken Kho to extend the time to file a response from March 30, 2020 to April 29, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Mar 12 2020||The motions to extend the time to file responses to the petition are granted and the time is extended to and including April 29, 2020, for all respondents.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief of respondent Julie A. Su, California Labor Commissioner in opposition filed.|
|Apr 29 2020||Brief of respondent Ken Kho in opposition filed.|
|May 19 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.|
|May 19 2020||Reply of petitioner OTO, L.L.C. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 08 2020||Petition DENIED.|
🚨 LIVE NOW 🚨 5PM on IGTV #SimplePolitics join me & @AHoweBlogger editor / reporter for the @SCOTUSblog for a great conversation on the recent decisions by the Supreme Court. There is so much to talk about.
SimplePolitics with Kim Wehle - Special Guest Bill Kristol, Editor-At-Large, The Bulwark
Tonight on #SimplePolitics, Bill Kristol and I have an in-depth conversation about Impeachment, what‘s next for ...
ICYMI: We got Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s first majority opinion today.
SCOTUS rules against immigrant who has lived in the US without authorization for decades. The gov't sought to deport him based on a state misdemeanor conviction (he used a fake Social Security card to get a job). SCOTUS says 5-3 he's not eligible to seek protection from removal.
NEW: In Freedom of Information Act case, SCOTUS says federal government does not have to disclose documents that were produced as part of a rulemaking on "cooling water intake structures" under the Clean Water Act. The Sierra Club argued the docs should be disclosed under FOIA.
At 10:00 a.m. EST, the Supreme Court will hand down one or more opinions in argued cases.
We’ll be live blogging through it at 9:45 with @AHoweBlogger, Mark Walsh, and @jamesromoser.
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, March 4 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, March 4, as the court releases opinions from the 2020-21 term. This live ...
SCOTUS will hear oral argument at 10:00 a.m. EST about when claimants must raise claims in the administrative process – “exhausting” their administrative remedies. Read more from Ronald Mann.
It might sound exhausting! But we claim it might be fun.
Justices to weigh issue exhaustion for Social Security claimants - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in Carr v. Saul involves a surprisingly basic question of administrative law: when claimants ...
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.