|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-290||8th Cir.||Mar 30, 2016||May 31, 2016||8-0||Roberts||OT 2015|
Holding: An approved jurisdictional determination by the United States Army Corps of Engineers definitively stating the presence or absence of waters of the United States on a particular property is a final agency action judicially reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-0, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on May 31, 2016. Justice Kennedy filed a concurring opinion, in which Justices Thomas and Alito joined. Justice Kagan filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 8 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 9, 2015)|
|Sep 14 2015||Waiver of right of respondents Hawkes Co., Inc., et al. to respond filed.|
|Sep 23 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 9, 2015.|
|Sep 28 2015||Response Requested . (Due October 28, 2015)|
|Oct 6 2015||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by The National Association of Home Builders.|
|Oct 8 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent Hawkes Co., Inc..|
|Oct 27 2015||Response to petition from respondents Hawkes Co., Inc., et al. filed.|
|Nov 10 2015||Reply of petitioner United States Army Corps of Engineers filed.|
|Nov 17 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 4, 2015.|
|Dec 7 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 11, 2015.|
|Dec 11 2015||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by The National Association of Home Builders GRANTED.|
|Dec 11 2015||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 19 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the respondents.|
|Jan 22 2016||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of cost filed.)|
|Jan 22 2016||Brief of petitioner United States Army Corps of Engineers filed.|
|Jan 29 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, March 30, 2016|
|Feb 3 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or of neither party received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Feb 8 2016||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit.|
|Feb 8 2016||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including February 24, 2016.|
|Feb 10 2016||CIRCULATED.|
|Feb 17 2016||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit. (1 Box)|
|Feb 24 2016||Brief of respondents Hawkes Co., Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 1 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Cause of Action Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 1 2016||Brief amici curiae of American Farm Bureau Federation, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 1 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 1 2016||Brief amicus curiae of The Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of Foundation for Environmental and Economic Progress, and Utility Water Act Group filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of the Council of State Governments, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amicus curiae of National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Southeastern Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of Ernest M. Park and Lauren Kent Park filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Mountain States Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of West Virginia, Ohio, and 21 Other States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amicus curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of California Farm Bureau Federation, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of Ohio Chamber of Commerce, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of States of North Dakota, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 2 2016||Brief amici curiae of The National Association of Home Builders, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 23 2016||Reply of petitioner United States Army Corps of Engineers filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 30 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: M. Reed Hopper, Sacramento, Cal.|
|May 31 2016||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined. Kagan, J., filed a concurring opinion. Ginsburg, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.|
|Jul 5 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
|Aug 18 2016||Record from U.S.C.A. 8th Circuit has been returned.|
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
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.