|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-1498||8th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2019|
Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit erred in holding—consistent with decisions of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit but in conflict with those of the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 3rd, 5th and 7th Circuits—that under Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, which imposes a highly deferential standard of judicial review to interpretations of Employee Retirement Income Security Act plans by administrators to whom the plans delegate interpretive discretion, an administrator’s determination that an ERISA plan authorizes certain remedial actions or measures is necessarily unreasonable merely because the plan is silent on the matter; and (2) whether the Firestone deference standard allows courts to reject an otherwise reasonable plan construction that is lawful under ERISA but, in the court’s view, pushes ERISA’s boundaries.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 30 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 1, 2019)|
|Jun 17 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 1, 2019 to July 31, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jun 18 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 31, 2019.|
|Jul 29 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 31, 2019 to August 30, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jul 30 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including August 30, 2019.|
|Aug 22 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 30, 2019 to October 1, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 23 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including October 1, 2019.|
|Sep 30 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 01 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including October 31, 2019.|
|Oct 21 2019||Stipulation of dismissal under Rule 46 filed.|
|Oct 22 2019||Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.|
NEW: The Supreme Court will review the legality of Biden's student-debt relief plan. The justices will hear oral argument in February. In the meantime, the plan remains blocked as a result of lower-court rulings.
Today at SCOTUS: One oral argument on the statute of limitations in the Quiet Title Act. Is it "jurisdictional"? Or just a "claim-processing rule"? That might sound arcane, but cases like these affect the ability of citizens to sue the federal government.
A squabble over a forest road may pave the way for further narrowing of “jurisdictional” timing rules - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in Wilkins v. United States is next in a protracted line of cases in which the court ...
Bribery or lobbying?
Percoco v. United States in a TikTok minute.
JUST IN: For the second time in the past week, SCOTUS denies an emergency request to block the execution of Kevin Johnson. The execution is scheduled for tonight in Missouri. Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissent from the brief order allowing the execution to proceed.
Today at SCOTUS: Can the federal government prioritize certain groups of unauthorized immigrants for deportation over others? And do states have standing to sue the government if they disagree with those priorities? @AHoweBlogger previews U.S. v. Texas:
In U.S. v. Texas, broad questions over immigration enforcement and states’ ability to challenge federal policies - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Tuesday in a dispute over the Biden administration’s authority to...
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral arguments in a pair of public-corruption cases, both stemming from scandals in New York politics that arose during Andrew Cuomo's time as governor. In both cases, the defendants are claiming prosecutorial overreach.