|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-357||2d Cir.||Apr 23, 2013||Jun 26, 2013||9-0||Scalia||OT 2012|
Holding: Attempting to compel a person to recommend that his employer approve an investment does not constitute “the obtaining of property from another” under the Hobbs Act.
Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on June 26, 2013. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Kennedy and Justice Sotomayor joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 19 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 24, 2012)|
|Oct 16 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 23, 2012.|
|Nov 20 2012||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Reply of petitioner Giridhar C. Sekhar filed.|
|Dec 5 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 4, 2013.|
|Jan 7 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 11, 2013.|
|Jan 11 2013||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 11 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesay, April 23, 2013|
|Feb 25 2013||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Feb 25 2013||Brief of petitioner Giridhar C. Sekhar filed.|
|Mar 1 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 4 2013||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 27 2013||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 15 2013||Reply of petitioner Giridhar C. Sekhar filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 23 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Paul D. Clement, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Sarah E. Harrington, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 26 2013||Judgment REVERSED. Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Kennedy and Sotomayor, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 29 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Wait wut.. RBG ghost-wrote the equal protection bits of Obergefell?!
And I learned this on @SCOTUSblog’s TikTok?! https://www.tiktok.com/@scotusblog/video/6922179577724931333
"This is not our first commission rodeo” says Levy. 😉
Love this write up of the @BrookingsInst's panel yesterday with @Susan_Hennessey, @danepps,@cdkang76, and @mollyereynolds.
Thanks, @SCOTUSblog and Kalvis Golde!
Spilling SCOTUS tea on TikTok today. Well, actually, @eskridgebill spilled the tea, we just tok’d about it. 🍵
The Supreme Court got rid of several cases this morning -- in one fell swoop. Read @AHoweBlogger's latest coverage of the emoluments cases, spiritual advisers at Texas executions, Texas abortion policies, COVID restrictions, and NY political corruption.
Justices vacate rulings on Trump and emoluments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday morning released orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. 22. The justices once again did not ac...
In this morning's orders list, SCOTUS took no action on pending cert petitions involving:
- Mississippi's near-ban on abortions after 15 weeks,
- a Trump rule banning Title X clinics from providing abortion referrals,
- the Trump administration's "public charge" immigration rule.
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.