|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-883||7th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether the Wisconsin Elections Commission and local election officials violated Article II, Section 1, clause 2 of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection during the 2020 presidential election by implementing unauthorized absentee voting practices in disregard of the Wisconsin Legislature’s explicit command that absentee voting must be “carefully regulated” and that absentee ballots cast outside of the legislature’s authorized procedures “may not be counted;” (2) whether this court should declare the Wisconsin election unconstitutional and void under Article II and thus failed under 3 U.S.C. § 2 and allow the Wisconsin Legislature to appoint its electors; and (3) whether federal courts may rely on the doctrine of laches to avoid reviewing electors clause or equal protection claims arising after absentee balloting began or which could not have reasonably been brought before absentee balloting commenced.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 30 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 3, 2021)|
|Dec 30 2020||Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari filed by petitioner.|
|Jan 11 2021||Motion to expedite consideration filed by petitioner DENIED|
|Jan 15 2021||Waiver of right of respondents Wisconsin Elections Commission, et al. to respond filed.|
|Jan 19 2021||Waiver of right of respondent Satya Rhodes-Conway, Maribeth Witzel-Behl, and Scott McDonell to respond filed.|
|Jan 20 2021||Waiver of right of respondent Governor Tony Evers to respond filed.|
|Jan 21 2021||Waiver of right of respondents Wisconsin State Conference NAACP; Dorothy Harrell; Wendell J. Harris, Sr.; Earnestine Moss to respond filed.|
|Jan 21 2021||Waiver of right of respondent Democratic National Commitee to respond filed.|
|Jan 22 2021||Waiver of right of respondents Cory Mason, Mayor of the City of Racine, et al. to respond filed.|
|Jan 25 2021||Waiver of right of respondent George L. Christenson, Julietta Henry to respond filed.|
|Jan 27 2021||Waiver of right of respondent Wisconsin Elections Commission, et al. to respond filed.|
|Feb 09 2021||Supplemental brief of petitioner Donald J. Trump filed.|
|Feb 17 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/5/2021.|
|Mar 08 2021||Petition DENIED.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
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.