|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-459||1st Cir.||Apr 23, 2018||Jun 21, 2018||8-1||Sotomayor||OT 2017|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in this case.
Holding: A putative notice sent to a nonpermanent resident to appear at a removal proceeding that fails to designate a specific time or place for that proceeding does not end the continuous residence period calculation necessary for possible cancellation of the individual’s removal.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on June 21, 2018. Justice Kennedy filed a concurring opinion. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 27 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 30, 2017)|
|Oct 25 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 29, 2017.|
|Oct 30 2017||Brief amicus curiae of American Immigration Lawyers Association filed.|
|Nov 15 2017||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 29, 2017 to December 12, 2017, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 16 2017||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including December 12, 2017.|
|Dec 12 2017||Brief of respondent Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General in opposition filed.|
|Dec 13 2017||Waiver of the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.|
|Dec 19 2017||Reply of petitioner Wescley Fonseca Pereira filed.|
|Dec 20 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2018.|
|Jan 08 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/12/2018.|
|Jan 12 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 25 2018||As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.|
|Feb 21 2018||Brief of petitioner Wescley Fonseca Pereira filed.|
|Feb 21 2018||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Feb 23 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 23, 2018.|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of National Immigrant Justice Center filed.|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amici curiae of American Immigration Lawyers Association, et al. filed.|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Former BIA Chairman & Immigration Judge Schmidt filed.|
|Mar 07 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 23 2018||Brief of respondent Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2018||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 1st Circuit.|
|Apr 02 2018||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 1st Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Apr 13 2018||Reply of petitioner Wescley Fonseca Pereira filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 23 2018||Argued. For petitioner: David J. Zimmer, Boston, Mass. For respondent: Frederick Liu, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 21 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|Jul 23 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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.