|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-992||Ark.||Not Argued||Jun 26, 2017||n/a||Per Curiam||OT 2016|
Holding: Having chosen to make its birth certificates more than mere markers of biological relationships and to use them to give married parents a form of legal recognition that is not available to unmarried parents, Arkansas may not, consistent with Obergefell v. Hodges, deny married same-sex couples that recognition.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded in a per curiam opinion on June 26, 2017. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Thomas and Alito joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 13 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 15, 2017)|
|Feb 24 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 14, 2017.|
|Mar 15 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.|
|Mar 15 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., et al.|
|Mar 15 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Family Equality Council, et al.|
|Mar 15 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Family Law Professors.|
|Apr 14 2017||Brief of respondent Nathaniel Smith in opposition filed.|
|May 1 2017||Reply of petitioners Marisa N. Pavan, et al. filed.|
|May 2 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 18, 2017.|
|May 22 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 25, 2017.|
|May 22 2017||Record Requested .|
|May 23 2017||Record received from the Supreme Court of Arkansas. The record is electronic.|
|May 30 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 1, 2017.|
|Jun 5 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 8, 2017.|
|Jun 12 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 15, 2017.|
|Jun 19 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 22, 2017.|
|Jun 26 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Family Equality Council, et al., GRANTED.|
|Jun 26 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Family Law Professors GRANTED.|
|Jun 26 2017||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., et al. GRANTED.|
|Jun 26 2017||Petition GRANTED. Judgment REVERSED and CASE REMANDED. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion). Justice Gorsuch, with whom Justice Thomas and Justice Alito join, dissenting. (Detached Opinion).|
|Jul 28 2017||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Jul 28 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.