|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-387||Wash.||Mar 21, 2018||May 21, 2018||7-2||Gorsuch||OT 2017|
Holding: County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakima Nation, 502 U. S. 251, addressed only a question of statutory interpretation of the Indian General Allotment Act of 1887, not the question whether Indian tribes have sovereign immunity in in rem lawsuits. The Lundgrens now ask the Supreme Court to affirm on an alternative, common-law ground: that the tribe cannot assert sovereign immunity because this suit relates to immovable property located in Washington state, purchased by the tribe in the same manner as a private individual. Because this alternative argument did not emerge until late in this case, the Washington Supreme Court should address it in the first instance.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch on May 21, 2018. Chief Justice Roberts filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Kennedy joined. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Sep 11 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 13, 2017)|
|Oct 13 2017||Brief of respondents Sharline Lundgren and Ray Lundgren in opposition filed.|
|Oct 27 2017||Reply of petitioner Upper Skagit Indian Tribe filed.|
|Nov 01 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/21/2017.|
|Nov 17 2017||Rescheduled.|
|Nov 27 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2017.|
|Dec 04 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2017.|
|Dec 08 2017||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 22 2018||Brief of petitioner Upper Skagit Indian Tribe filed.|
|Jan 22 2018||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Jan 24 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, March 21, 2018|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of Cayuga Nation, Seneca Nation of Indians, Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Cherokee Nation, Pueblo of Pojoaque filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, and Skokomish Indian Tribe filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of States of Illinois, Indiana, New Mexico, and Texas filed in Support of Neither Party|
|Jan 29 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Congress of American Indians, et al. filed.|
|Feb 07 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Feb 21 2018||Record requested from the Supreme Court of Washington.|
|Feb 21 2018||Brief of respondents Sharline Lundgren and Ray Lundgren filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Public Service Company of New Mexico filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amici curiae of Village of Union Springs, Town of Springport, Cayuga County filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Seneca County, New York filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 12 2018||Reply of petitioner Upper Skagit Indian Tribe filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 16 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Mar 21 2018||Argued. For petitioner: David S. Hawkins, Sedro-Woolley, Wash.; and Ann O’Connell, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Eric D. Miller, Seattle, Wash.|
|May 21 2018||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Gorsuch, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Roberts, C. J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Kennedy, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Alito, J., joined.|
|Jun 22 2018||MANDATE ISSUED.|
|Jun 22 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Wait wut.. RBG ghost-wrote the equal protection bits of Obergefell?!
And I learned this on @SCOTUSblog’s TikTok?! https://www.tiktok.com/@scotusblog/video/6922179577724931333
"This is not our first commission rodeo” says Levy. 😉
Love this write up of the @BrookingsInst's panel yesterday with @Susan_Hennessey, @danepps,@cdkang76, and @mollyereynolds.
Thanks, @SCOTUSblog and Kalvis Golde!
Spilling SCOTUS tea on TikTok today. Well, actually, @eskridgebill spilled the tea, we just tok’d about it. 🍵
The Supreme Court got rid of several cases this morning -- in one fell swoop. Read @AHoweBlogger's latest coverage of the emoluments cases, spiritual advisers at Texas executions, Texas abortion policies, COVID restrictions, and NY political corruption.
Justices vacate rulings on Trump and emoluments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday morning released orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. 22. The justices once again did not ac...
In this morning's orders list, SCOTUS took no action on pending cert petitions involving:
- Mississippi's near-ban on abortions after 15 weeks,
- a Trump rule banning Title X clinics from providing abortion referrals,
- the Trump administration's "public charge" immigration rule.
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.