|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-312||9th Cir.||Mar 26, 2018||May 14, 2018||9-0||Roberts||OT 2017|
Holding: The defendants’ appeals challenging the use of full restraints during nonjury pretrial proceedings became moot when their underlying criminal cases came to an end before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit could render its decision.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on May 14, 2018.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 29 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 28, 2017)|
|Sep 19 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 13, 2017, for all respondents.|
|Sep 28 2017||Brief amici curiae of Senator Jeff Flake, et al. filed.|
|Sep 28 2017||Brief amicus curiae of California State Sheriffs' Association filed.|
|Nov 13 2017||Brief of respondents Moises Patricio-Guzman, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Moises Patricio-Guzman|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Rene Sanchez-Gomez|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Jasmin Isabel Morales|
|Nov 13 2017||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Mark William Ring|
|Nov 20 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2017.|
|Nov 21 2017||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 08 2017||Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondents GRANTED.|
|Dec 08 2017||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Jan 22 2018||Brief of petitioner United States filed.|
|Jan 22 2018||Joint appendix filed.|
|Jan 24 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, March 26, 2018|
|Feb 07 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Feb 21 2018||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Feb 21 2018||Brief of respondents Moises Patricio-Guzman, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amici curiae of Former Judges, Former Prosecutors, Former Government Officials, Law Professors, and Social Scientists filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Federal Defenders filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 14 2018||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 23 2018||Motion for appointment of counsel filed by respondent Rene Sanchez-Gomez.|
|Mar 26 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Allon Kedem, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Reuben C. Cahn, San Diego, Cal.|
|Apr 11 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/27/2018.|
|Apr 30 2018||Motion to appoint counsel filed by respondent GRANTED, and Ellis M. Johnston, III, Esquire, of San Diego, California, is appointed to serve as counsel for respondent Rene Sanchez-Gomez in this case.|
|May 14 2018||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jun 15 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
NEW: The Justice Department, as expected, says it plans to ask the Supreme Court to block enforcement of the Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.
NEW: Biden's commission studying proposals for Supreme Court reform has released 200+ pages of "discussion materials" in advance of its final report, slated to be issued next month. The materials are divided into five categories and are available here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/pcscotus/public-meetings/october-15-2021-pcscotus-meeting/
Curious: This morning the Supreme Court website had a dropdown menu option called “financial disclosure reports” (although nothing to see when you click on it). Now it’s gone
Today at SCOTUS: The Biden administration will appear before the justices asking to reinstate the death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev -- despite Biden's campaign pledge to end the death penalty and the DOJ's recent moratorium on federal executions.
Brett Kavanaugh was back on the bench today after participating in last week's arguments remotely due to his positive COVID test. Here's the full nine-person bench, in a sketch by @Courtartist.
#SCOTUS calls for the views of the US Solicitor General in Epic Systems v. Tata Consultancy Services, re whether a punitive damages award that complies with a state law that caps punitive damages passes constitutional muster