|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-67||9th Cir.||Feb 25, 2020||May 7, 2020||9-0||Ginsburg||OT 2019|
Holding: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit panel’s drastic departure from the principle of party presentation constituted an abuse of discretion when the court reached out to decide a question never raised by the respondent, namely, whether 8 U. S. C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) is unconstitutionally overbroad.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on May 7, 2020. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Apr 29 2019||Application (18A1117) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 13, 2019 to June 12, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Apr 30 2019||Application (18A1117) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until June 12, 2019.|
|May 31 2019||Application (18A1117) to extend further the time from June 12, 2019 to July 12, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|May 31 2019||Application (18A1117) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until July 12, 2019.|
|Jul 12 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 12, 2019)|
|Jul 18 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 12, 2019 to August 28, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jul 19 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 28, 2019.|
|Aug 28 2019||Brief of respondent Evelyn Sineneng-Smith in opposition filed.|
|Sep 10 2019||Reply of petitioner United States filed.|
|Sep 11 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.|
|Oct 04 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Oct 25 2019||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Nov 15 2019||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including December 2, 2019. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 15, 2020.|
|Nov 26 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, February 25, 2020.|
|Dec 02 2019||Joint appendix filed.|
|Dec 02 2019||Brief of petitioner United States filed.|
|Dec 09 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Eugene Volokh in support of neither party filed.|
|Dec 09 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Immigration Reform Law Institute filed.|
|Jan 09 2020||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Jan 09 2020||The record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Jan 14 2020||The record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit and from the U.S.D.C. California Northern District (San Jose) is electronic and located on PACER, and sealed record material from both courts received by Clerk and available electronically.|
|Jan 15 2020||Brief of respondent Evelyn Sineneng-Smith filed.|
|Jan 20 2020||Brief amici curiae of The Rutherford Institute, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 21 2020||CIRCULATED|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amici curiae of Immigration Representatives and Organizations filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Amicus brief of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers not accepted for filing. (January 28, 2020 - Corrected brief to be submitted.)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed. (January 28, 2020). (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Amnesty International filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amici curiae of Religious Organizations filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amici curiae of The Electronic Frontier Foundation, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amicus curiae of The Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amici curiae of City and County of San Francisco, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 22 2020||Brief amici curiae of Asian Americans Advancing Justice, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 14 2020||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 25 2020||Argued. For petitioner: Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Mark C. Fleming, Boston, Mass.|
|May 07 2020||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion.|
|Jun 08 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Today at SCOTUS: Two oral arguments starting at 10 a.m. EST. One is on federal anti-discrimination laws. The other is on Medicare payments for drugs dispensed by hospitals -- with big questions about the doctrine of Chevron deference lurking in the background.
Bill Cosby’s prosecutors asked the Supreme Court to reinstate his conviction today. Quick explainer.
In our latest episode of SCOTUStalk, @shefalil of @19thnews joined us to preview Wednesday's argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. Shefali explains the current state of abortion access and the case's implications in Mississippi and across America.
Roe, Dobbs, and the current state of abortion access - SCOTUSblog
In advance of Wednesday's oral argument in the momentous abortion case, Shefali Luthra, a gender and health care r...
Update: Without calling for a response or referring the case to the full court, Justice Breyer just rejected last week's challenge from Massachusetts hospital workers who object to the hospital's COVID vaccine mandate.
(Breyer handles emergency requests from Massachusetts.)
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket challenge to a COVID vaccine mandate. This one is from employees at Mass General Brigham who say the Boston-based hospital violated federal law by not granting them exemptions from the hospital's vaccine policy. Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/21A175.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral argument in a case about Medicare payments to hospitals that serve low-income patients. Lots of money at stake, plus potential implications for the Chevron doctrine. @JACoganJr explains the case:
Money for safety-net hospitals at stake in dispute over Medicare payment formula - SCOTUSblog
When it comes to highlighting the complexity of the Medicare Act and its hospital payment rules, Becerra v. Empire...
Two days from now, SCOTUS will hear the biggest abortion case in a generation. In a battle over a Mississippi law, abortion opponents are asking the court to end the constitutional right to abortion. Here's our preview of the case, via @AHoweBlogger.
Roe v. Wade hangs in balance as reshaped court prepares to hear biggest abortion case in decades - SCOTUSblog
When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would...