|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|14-6381||La.||TBD||TBD||TBD||Per Curiam||OT 2014|
Holding: Case on whether the Court’s 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama, holding that the Constitution prohibits a mandatory sentence of life without parole for a defendant who was under the age of eighteen at the time of the crime, dismissed as moot after a settlement that included the inmate’s release from prison.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 18 2014||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 23, 2014)|
|Sep 29 2014||Brief of respondent Louisiana in opposition filed.|
|Oct 16 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 31, 2014.|
|Nov 3 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 7, 2014.|
|Nov 5 2014||Record Requested.|
|Nov 10 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 14, 2014.|
|Nov 17 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 25, 2014.|
|Nov 20 2014||Record received from the Supreme Court of Louisiana. The record is electronic.|
|Dec 1 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2014.|
|Dec 8 2014||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 12, 2014.|
|Dec 12 2014||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED. Petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED limited to the following questions: 1) Does the rule announced in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U. S. ____ (2012), apply retroactively to this case? 2) Is a federal question raised by a claim that a state collateral review court erroneously failed to find a Teague exception?.|
|Jan 7 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Jan 26 2015||Brief of petitioner George Toca filed.|
|Jan 26 2015||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Feb 2 2015||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, March 30, 2015|
|Feb 2 2015||Stipulation to dismiss the writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 46 received.|
|Feb 3 2015||Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.|
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.