|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-108||P.R.||Jan 13, 2016||Jun 9, 2016||6-2||Kagan||OT 2015|
Holding: The Double Jeopardy Clause bars Puerto Rico and the United States from successively prosecuting a single person for the same conduct under equivalent criminal laws.
Judgment: Affirmed, 6-2, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 9, 2016. Justice Ginsburg filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 5 2015||Application (14A1236) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 18, 2015 to July 20, 2015, submitted to Justice Breyer.|
|Jun 5 2015||Application (14A1236) granted by Justice Breyer extending the time to file until July 20, 2015.|
|Jul 17 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 24, 2015)|
|Aug 24 2015||Brief of respondents Luis M. Sanchez Valle, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Sep 8 2015||Reply of petitioner Commonwealth of Puerto Rico filed.|
|Sep 9 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 28, 2015.|
|Oct 1 2015||Petition GRANTED.|
|Oct 19 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Oct 20 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the respondents.|
|Nov 16 2015||Joint appendix filed. (Corrected Joint Appendix filed and distributed on 1/31/16.) (Statement of costs filed)|
|Nov 16 2015||Brief of petitioner Commonwealth of Puerto Rico filed.|
|Nov 24 2015||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, January 13, 2016|
|Dec 4 2015||Record requested from the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico.|
|Dec 15 2015||CIRCULATED.|
|Dec 15 2015||Record received from the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico. 1 Box.|
|Dec 16 2015||Brief of respondents Luis M. Sanchez Valle, and James Gomez Vazquez filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 22 2015||Brief amici curiae of Professors Christina Duffy Ponsa and Sam Erman filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 22 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Virgin Islands Bar Association filed.|
|Dec 23 2015||Brief amici curiae of Current and Former Senior Puerto Rico Officials filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 23 2015||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 23 2015||Brief amici curiae of Colegio de Abogados y Abogadas de Puerto Rico, and The Puerto Rican Bar Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 23 2015||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Dec 23 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers - Miami Chapter filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 5 2016||Reply of petitioner Commonwealth of Puerto Rico filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 8 2016||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Jan 8 2016||Letter from Clerk of Court advising that counsel should be prepared to discuss at oral argument whether this Court has jurisdiction to review the ruling of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico under 28 U.S.C. Sec.1258.|
|Jan 11 2016||Supplemental brief of petitioner Commonwealth of Puerto Rico filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2016||Letter from counsel for the respondent received.|
|Jan 13 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Christopher Landau, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C.; and Nicole A. Saharsky, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae).|
|Jun 9 2016||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Alito, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor, J., joined.|
|Jul 12 2016||MANDATE ISSUED|
|Jul 12 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
|Jul 28 2016||Record from the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 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.