|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-466||4th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2019|
Issues: (1) Whether in Scott v. Harris the Supreme Court announced an “exception” to the summary-judgment standard in cases commenced under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and if not, whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit erred when it deviated from other circuit holdings and announced that Scott directs the lower courts to examine whether a self-serving narrative is contradicted by individual pieces of the record, as opposed to the entire record, to discern if a genuine dispute of material fact exists; and (2) whether the respondent, Herman Harris, “clearly established” his right to be free from excess force when Harris assaulted the petitioner, Zachery Pittman, in a wooded area, attempted to murder Pittman with his service weapon and presented a lethal threat until Pittman fired in rapid succession.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 07 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 8, 2019)|
|Nov 08 2019||Waiver of right of respondent Herman Harris to respond filed.|
|Nov 20 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2019.|
|Dec 03 2019||Response Requested. (Due January 2, 2020)|
|Dec 06 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 2, 2020 to February 3, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Dec 09 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 3, 2020.|
|Feb 03 2020||Brief of respondent Herman Harris in opposition filed.|
|Feb 07 2020||Reply of petitioner Zachery Pittman filed.|
|Feb 12 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2020.|
|Mar 02 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.|
|Mar 09 2020||Petition DENIED. Justice Alito would grant the petition for a writ of certiorari.|
The Supreme Court sides with Sen. Ted Cruz in his First Amendment challenge to a federal campaign-finance law that limits how and when candidates can recoup loans that they make to their own campaigns. The vote is 6-3 along ideological lines.
In an immigration case, SCOTUS rules 5-4 that federal courts do NOT have jurisdiction to review certain executive-branch factual findings that determine whether non-citizens are eligible for "adjustment of status." Those findings can dictate whether a person is deported.
SCOTUS agrees to take up two new cases: Jones v. Hendrix (a habeas corpus case) and SEC v. Cochran (a case about the power of district courts to hear challenges to the constitutionality of the SEC's administrative law proceedings). Full order list here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/051622zor_hgcj.pdf
We're live now on SCOTUSblog's homepage or at https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/05/announcement-of-orders-and-opinions-for-monday-may-16/
Today at SCOTUS: The court will issue one or more opinions in argued cases at 10 a.m. EDT. But first, orders on pending petitions at 9:30. We'll fire up our live blog at 9:25 to break it all down and answer your questions. Grab some ☕️ and come join us: https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/05/announcement-of-orders-and-opinions-for-monday-may-16/
Today at SCOTUS: The court will issue one or more opinions in argued cases at 10 a.m. EDT. But first, orders on pending petitions at 9:30. We'll fire up our live blog at 9:25 to break it all down and answer your questions. Grab some ☕️ and come join us:
Announcement of orders and opinions for Monday, May 16 - SCOTUSblog
On Monday, May 16, we will be live blogging as the court releases orders from the May 12 conference and opinio...
We can announce, however, that we'll be liveblogging the release of orders from today's conference AND opinions, starting at around 9:25 @SCOTUSblog. Please join us to discuss the leak, pending opinions, and whatever other SCOTUS-related issues are on your mind. https://twitter.com/AHoweBlogger/status/1524788054434660353
#SCOTUS will release opinions from argued cases at 10 am on Monday. The Court does not announce in advance how many opinions it will release or which ones.