|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-556||7th Cir.||Nov 26, 2012||Jun 24, 2013||5-4||Alito||OT 2012|
Holding: An employee is a “supervisor” for purposes of vicarious liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act only if he is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 24, 2013. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 10 2011||Application (11A192) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 1, 2011 to October 31, 2011, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Aug 16 2011||Application (11A192) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until October 31, 2011.|
|Oct 31 2011||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 2, 2011)|
|Nov 15 2011||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 3, 2012.|
|Dec 13 2011||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including January 17, 2012.|
|Jan 17 2012||Brief of respondent Ball State University in opposition filed.|
|Jan 31 2012||Reply of petitioner Maetta Vance filed.|
|Feb 1 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 17, 2012.|
|Feb 21 2012||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|May 24 2012||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Jun 4 2012||Supplemental brief of petitioner Maetta Vance filed.|
|Jun 5 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 21, 2012.|
|Jun 25 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 17 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 29, 2012.|
|Jul 17 2012||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including October 19, 2012.|
|Jul 26 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Aug 1 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Aug 29 2012||Joint appendix filed.|
|Aug 29 2012||Brief of petitioner Maetta Vance filed.|
|Sep 5 2012||Brief amicus curiae of United States in support of neither party filed.|
|Sep 5 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Employment Lawyers Association and AARP filed.|
|Sep 5 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Partnership for Women & Families, et al. filed.|
|Sep 14 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, November 26, 2012.|
|Sep 14 2012||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 26 2012||Record from U.S.C.A. for 7th Circuit is electronic.|
|Sep 26 2012||The record from the U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of Alabama is electronic.|
|Oct 19 2012||Brief of respondents Ball State University, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 25 2012||Brief amicus curiae of American Council on Education, et al. filed.|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amici curiae of Society for Human Resource Management, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Equal Employment Advisory Council filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amicus curiae of New England Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Retail Federation filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 13 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Nov 13 2012||Reply of petitioner Maetta Vance filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 26 2012||Argued. For petitioner: Daniel R. Ortiz, Charlottesville, Va. For United States, as amicus curiae: Sri Srinivasan, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Gregory G. Garre, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 24 2013||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 26 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
A majority of the Supreme Court seems inclined to uphold Mississippi's 15-week abortion law, but the six conservative justices appear divided about whether to entirely overrule Roe v. Wade. @AHoweBlogger's first take from this morning's argument:
Majority of court appears poised to uphold Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks - SCOTUSblog
It has been nearly 30 years since the Supreme Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirme...
Starting momentarily: Oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case involving Mississippi’s attempt to ban nearly all abortions after 15 weeks. The state has asked the court to overturn Roe v. Wade. We’ll be live-tweeting the argument here in this thread.
Twenty minutes before the start of oral argument, here’s the scene outside the Supreme Court.
Photos by @katieleebarlow.
TODAY AT SCOTUS: The case that could determine the future of abortion in America. Oral argument begins at 10 a.m. EST. We'll be live-tweeting the full argument. You can also listen live here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx.
Here's our preview from @AHoweBlogger: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/11/roe-v-wade-hangs-in-balance-as-reshaped-court-prepares-to-hear-biggest-abortion-case-in-decades/
Our cross-platform coverage of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization includes, of course, TikTok. Follow us there if you don't already! And tune in for @katieleebarlow's live dispatch from outside the court tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. EST.
SCOTUS was inundated with "friend of the court" briefs -- more than 140 of them -- in the abortion case being heard tomorrow. We reviewed them all. Here's a guide to the many arguments being pushed by academics, politicians, & interest groups in the case.
We read all the amicus briefs in Dobbs so you don’t have to - SCOTUSblog
More than 140 amicus briefs were filed in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the potentially momentou...