|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-1009||9th Cir.||TBD||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2021|
Issue: Whether application of the equitable rule the Supreme Court announced in Martinez v. Ryan renders the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which precludes a federal court from considering evidence outside the state-court record when reviewing the merits of a claim for habeas relief if a prisoner or his attorney has failed to diligently develop the claim’s factual basis in state court, inapplicable to a federal court’s merits review of a claim for habeas relief.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 20 2021||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 26, 2021)|
|Feb 17 2021||Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 26, 2021 to March 29, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Feb 18 2021||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 29, 2021.|
|Feb 26 2021||Brief amici curiae of The States of Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, and Utah filed.|
|Mar 29 2021||Brief of respondent David Martinez Ramirez in opposition filed.|
|Apr 14 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.|
|Apr 16 2021||Reply of petitioners David Shinn, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|May 10 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.|
|May 17 2021||Petition GRANTED.|
|May 25 2021||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jun 08 2021||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 15, 2021. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 13, 2021.|
|Jun 10 2021||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, David Shinn, et al.|
|Jun 10 2021||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, David Martinez Ramirez|
Monday's decision rejecting sentence reductions for low-level crack-cocaine offenders may have been unanimous, but @ekownyankah writes that there is far more going on than the ruling's dry textual analysis might indicate. Read his incisive analysis here:
After decades, Congress reduced the racially unjust crack/cocaine disparity... raising amounts required for prison time. Why would Congress have left small time dealers to rot in prison for decades?
My thoughts on SCOTUS's ruling in Terry v. United States:https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/unanimous-ruling-on-crack-cocaine-disparity-is-heavy-on-text-light-on-history/
No more SCOTUS opinions for today. There are 18 cases still outstanding from the current term, including disputes over Obamacare, religious rights and voting rights. The next opinion day that we know of is Thursday.
SCOTUS rules 9-0 that people convicted of certain low-level crack-cocaine offenses are not eligible for re-sentencing under the First Step Act, a 2018 law that made some criminal-justice reforms retroactive. Here is the opinion in Terry v. United States. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-5904_i4dk.pdf
SCOTUS sides with the gov in 2 cases about whether certain criminal defendants are entitled to new trials / new plea hearings as a result of the court's 2019 ruling in Rehaif v. United States which narrowed a federal law barring people with felony convictions from possessing guns
In a relatively quiet Monday morning order list, SCOTUS takes up no new cases. But it does invite the federal government to submit a brief on the pending petition that asks the justices to take up a challenge to Harvard's affirmative action policy. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/061421zor_6j36.pdf
The Supreme Court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. ET followed by opinion(s?) at 10:00.
There are 21 opinions outstanding including Obamacare, LGBTQ+ rights vs. religious liberty, and student speech.
We’ll crank up the live blog at 9:25. Join us!
Announcement of orders and opinions for Monday, June 14 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Monday, June 14, as the court releases orders from the June 10 conference and one ...
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.