|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-8976||D.C. Cir.||Nov 6, 2012||Jan 9, 2013||9-0||Scalia||OT 2012|
Holding: A defendant bears the burden of proving a defense of withdrawal from conspiracy.
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on January 9, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 27 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 29, 2012)|
|Mar 22 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 30, 2012.|
|Apr 25 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including May 14, 2012.|
|May 14 2012||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|May 29 2012||Reply of petitioner Calvin Smith and John Raynor filed. (Distributed)|
|May 30 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 14, 2012.|
|Jun 18 2012||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED limited to Question II presented by the petition.|
|Jul 17 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 20, 2012.|
|Jul 17 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 5, 2012.|
|Jul 17 2012||Counsel for the petitioner agrees to file any reply brief on the merits on or before October 26, 2012.|
|Jul 23 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, November 6, 2012|
|Aug 20 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Aug 20 2012||Brief of petitioners Calvin Smith and John Raynor filed.|
|Aug 24 2012||CIRCULATED.|
|Aug 27 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 31 2012||Record received from U.S.C.A. for District of Columbia Circuit. (3 boxes)|
|Aug 31 2012||Record received from U.S.D.C. for District of Columbia. (26 boxes)|
|Oct 5 2012||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2012||Reply of petitioners Calvin Smith and John Raynor filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 6 2012||Argued. For petitioners: A. J. Kramer, Federal Public Defender, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Sarah E. Harrington, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jan 9 2013||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Scalia, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Feb 11 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Apr 3 2013||Record returned to U.S.C.A. for District of Columbia Circuit.|
|Apr 3 2013||Record returned to U.S.D.C. for the District of Columbia.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.