|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-184||C.A.A.F.||Oct 13, 2020||Dec 10, 2020||8-0||Alito||OT 2020|
Holding: The prosecutions of three military service members for rape were timely under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Alito on December 10, 2020. Justice Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 31 2019||Application (18A1257) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 10, 2019 to July 10, 2019, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Jun 06 2019||Application (18A1257) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until July 10, 2019.|
|Jun 28 2019||Application (18A1257) to extend further the time from July 10, 2019 to August 9, 2019, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Jul 03 2019||Application (18A1257) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until August 9, 2019.|
|Aug 09 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 9, 2019)|
|Aug 30 2019||Motion respondent Humphrey Daniels to extend the time to file a response from September 9, 2019 to October 9, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Sep 05 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 9, 2019, for all respondents.|
|Sep 09 2019||Brief of respondent Richard D. Collins in opposition filed.|
|Sep 09 2019||Brief amici curiae of Harmony Allen and Tonja Schulz filed.|
|Oct 09 2019||Brief of respondent Humphrey Daniels in opposition filed.|
|Oct 23 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/8/2019.|
|Oct 23 2019||Reply of petitioner USA filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 12 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2019.|
|Nov 15 2019||Petition GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 19-108 is granted. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.|
|Nov 15 2019||Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 19-108. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 19-108. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”|
|Jan 31 2020||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 23, 2020. VIDED|
|Feb 19 2020||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. Armed Forces.|
|Feb 19 2020||CIRCULATED|
|Feb 26 2020||Record received from the U.S.C.A. for the Armed Forces. (1-Envelope)|
|Mar 16 2020||ORAL ARGUMENT POSTPONED. VIDED.|
|Apr 13 2020||Argument to be rescheduled for the October Term 2020. VIDED.|
|Jul 13 2020||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 13, 2020. VIDED.|
|Oct 13 2020||Argued. For petitioner: Jeffrey B. Wall, Acting Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. For respondents: Stephen I. Vladeck, Austin, Tex. VIDED.|
|Dec 10 2020||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Barrett, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the cases. Gorsuch, J., filed a concurring opinion. VIDED.|
|Jan 11 2021||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
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 ...
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.