|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-331||4th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether a writ of mandamus is appropriate because, contrary to the holding of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the 4th Circuit, the district court’s denial of the president’s motion to dismiss was clear and indisputable legal error; and (2) whether a writ of mandamus is appropriate, contrary to the holding of the 4th Circuit, when the district court’s refusal to grant the president’s motion to certify an interlocutory appeal was a clear abuse of discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 09 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 14, 2020)|
|Oct 06 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 14, 2020 to November 28, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 07 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 30, 2020. See Rule 30.1.|
|Oct 14 2020||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Scholar Seth Barrett Tillman and the Judicial Education Project.|
|Nov 18 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 30, 2020 to December 30, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 19 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part; the time is extended to and including December 14, 2020.|
|Dec 08 2020||Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 15.5. filed.|
|Dec 14 2020||Brief of respondents District of Columbia and the State of Maryland in opposition filed.|
|Dec 23 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.|
|Dec 23 2020||Reply of petitioner In Re Donald J.Trump filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 19 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.|
|Jan 25 2021||Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Scholar Seth Barrett Tillman, et al. GRANTED.|
|Jan 25 2021||Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED with instructions to dismiss the case as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).|
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.