|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-938||6th Cir.||Nov 13, 2019||Jan 14, 2020||9-0||Ginsburg||OT 2019|
Holding: A bankruptcy court’s order unreservedly denying relief from the automatic stay constitutes a final, immediately appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on January 14, 2020.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 14 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 19, 2019)|
|Mar 06 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2019.|
|Mar 13 2019||Response Requested. (Due April 12, 2019)|
|Apr 12 2019||Brief of respondent Jackson Masonry, LLC in opposition filed.|
|Apr 17 2019||Reply of petitioner Ritzen Group, Inc. filed.|
|Apr 18 2019||Rule 29.6 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed.|
|Apr 23 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.|
|May 13 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2019.|
|May 20 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 09 2019||Motion of petitioner for an extension of time filed.|
|Jun 26 2019||Motion to extend the time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including August 5, 2019.|
|Jul 08 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 13, 2019.|
|Aug 05 2019||Brief of petitioner Ritzen Group, Inc. filed. (Corrected brief submitted).|
|Aug 05 2019||Brief of petitioner Ritzen Group, Inc. filed. (October 4, 2019). (Distributed)|
|Aug 05 2019||Joint appendix filed.|
|Aug 23 2019||Motion for an extension of time to file respondents' brief on the merits filed.|
|Aug 29 2019||Motion to extend the time to file respondent's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including October 4, 2019.|
|Sep 03 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 16 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.|
|Sep 18 2019||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit is electronic.|
|Oct 04 2019||Brief of respondent Jackson Masonry, LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 11 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 11 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Oct 11 2019||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 21 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 21 2019||Proposal of respondent to lodge copies of documents in related cases cited in respondent's brief on the merits filed.|
|Nov 04 2019||Reply of petitioner Ritzen Group, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 13 2019||Argued. For petitioner: James K. Lehman, Columbia, S. C. For respondent: Griffin S. Dunham, Nashville, Tenn.; and Vivek Suri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Jan 14 2020||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Feb 18 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
We are honored to be chosen as the winner of an American Journalism Online Award for Best Non-profit News Source. Thanks to everyone for reading & supporting SCOTUSblog, including on our opinion-day live blogs, which the awarding judge called a "digital townsquare." #AJOawards
The winner of the award for Best Non-Profit News Source is @scotusblog. Judge @juliachanb called the site “a crucial tool in a political journalist’s toolbox” and praised their recent site revamp and dedication to transparency. https://www.scotusblog.com 2/
Quick Tok explainer on yesterday’s voting rights case at the Supreme Court—Merrill v. Milligan.
The Mar-a-Lago case arrives at the Supreme Court. Here's an explainer on today's filing from @katieleebarlow, who notes that this isn't the first time Trump has asked the justices to intervene in fights over sensitive documents. (Both other times, the court ruled against him.)
In today's Voting Rights Act case, the conservative majority seemed likely to side with Alabama, though perhaps on narrower grounds than the state asked for. Here's @AHoweBlogger's analysis, plus courtroom sketches from Bill Hennessy (AKA @Artisbest).
Conservative justices seem poised to uphold Alabama’s redistricting plan in Voting Rights Act challenge - SCOTUSblog
In February, a divided Supreme Court temporarily blocked a ruling by a three-judge district court in Alabama, which ...
BREAKING: Donald Trump's lawyers have filed an emergency request asking the Supreme Court to intervene in the case over classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Trump wants SCOTUS to vacate a Sept. 21 ruling by the 11th Circuit. Here is the filing: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/22A283.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: voting rights and veterans' benefits.
First up is Merrill v. Milligan, a case about Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and how to decide if a state's redistricting plan dilutes Black voting power. @AHoweBlogger explains:
When are majority-Black voting districts required? In Alabama case, the justices will review that question. - SCOTUSblog
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bars election practices that result in a denial or abridgement of the right ...