|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-1414||9th Cir.||Mar 23, 2021||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2020|
Issue: Whether the lower courts erred in suppressing evidence on the theory that a police officer of an Indian tribe lacked authority to temporarily detain and search the respondent, Joshua James Cooley, a non-Indian, on a public right-of-way within a reservation based on a potential violation of state or federal law.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 19 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 24, 2020)|
|Jul 10 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 24, 2020 to August 24, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jul 13 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 24, 2020.|
|Jul 24 2020||Brief amici curiae of Crow Tribe of Indians, National Congress of American Indians and Other Tribal Organizations filed.|
|Jul 24 2020||Brief amici curiae of National Indigenous Women's Resource Center, et al. filed.|
|Aug 21 2020||Waiver of right of respondent Joshua James Cooley to respond filed.|
|Aug 26 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.|
|Sep 15 2020||Response Requested. (Due October 15, 2020)|
|Oct 15 2020||Brief of respondent Joshua James Cooley in opposition filed.|
|Oct 15 2020||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Joshua James Cooley.|
|Oct 22 2020||Waiver of the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed.|
|Oct 28 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/13/2020.|
|Oct 28 2020||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/20/2020.|
|Nov 20 2020||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED.|
|Nov 20 2020||Petition GRANTED.|
|Dec 18 2020||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Dec 31 2020||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 8, 2021. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including February 12, 2021.|
|Jan 04 2021||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner United States.|
|Jan 08 2021||Brief of petitioner United States filed.|
|Jan 14 2021||Brief amici curiae of Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, et al. filed.|
|Jan 14 2021||Brief amici curiae of Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation filed.|
|Jan 15 2021||Brief amicus curiae of Indian Law Scholars and Professors filed.|
|Jan 15 2021||Brief amici curiae of National Congress of American Indians and Other Tribal Organizations filed.|
|Jan 15 2021||Brief amici curiae of Current and Former Members of Congress filed.|
|Jan 15 2021||Brief amici curiae of National Indigenous Women's Resource Center, et al. filed.|
|Jan 15 2021||Brief amici curiae of Cayuga Nation, et al. filed.|
|Jan 15 2021||Brief amici curiae of Former United States Attorneys filed.|
|Jan 19 2021||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Feb 01 2021||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, March 23, 2021.|
|Feb 04 2021||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Feb 04 2021||Record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.|
|Feb 12 2021||Brief of respondent Joshua James Cooley filed.|
|Feb 19 2021||Brief amici curiae of The Ninth Circuit Federal Public and Community Defenders filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2021||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2021||Amicus brief of Citizens Equal Rights Foundation not accepted for filing. (Corrected brief submitted - March 22, 2021)|
|Feb 19 2021||Brief amicus curiae of Citizens Equal Rights Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 22 2021||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 10 2021||Motion to appoint counsel filed by respondent Joshua James Cooley.|
|Mar 12 2021||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 15 2021||Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/19/2021.|
|Mar 19 2021||Motion to appoint counsel filed by respondent GRANTED, and Eric R. Henkel, Esquire, of Missoula, Montana, is appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case.|
|Mar 23 2021||Argued. For petitioner: Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Eric R. Henkel, Missoula, Mont. (Appointed by this Court.)|
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.