|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|21-499||9th Cir.||Apr 20, 2022||Jun 23, 2022||6-3||Alito||OT 2021|
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 23, 2022. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Breyer and Sotomayor joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 01 2021||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 3, 2021)|
|Oct 29 2021||Waiver of right of respondent Terence B. Tekoh to respond filed.|
|Nov 02 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/19/2021.|
|Nov 03 2021||Brief amici curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association, et al. filed.|
|Nov 03 2021||Brief amici curiae of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Nov 03 2021||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Police Organizations filed.|
|Nov 04 2021||Response Requested. (Due December 6, 2021)|
|Dec 06 2021||Brief of respondent Terence B. Tekoh in opposition filed.|
|Dec 22 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.|
|Dec 22 2021||Reply of petitioner Carlos Vega filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 10 2022||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/14/2022.|
|Jan 14 2022||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 16 2022||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Terence B. Tekoh|
|Feb 16 2022||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Carlos Vega|
|Feb 28 2022||Brief of petitioner Carlos Vega filed.|
|Feb 28 2022||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Mar 07 2022||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Mar 07 2022||Brief amici curiae of Local Government Organizations (IMLA) filed.|
|Mar 07 2022||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Police Organizations filed.|
|Mar 07 2022||Brief amici curiae of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Mar 08 2022||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.|
|Mar 15 2022||ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, April 20, 2022.|
|Mar 16 2022||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Mar 17 2022||The record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer, with the exception of one Sealed document that has been electronically filed.|
|Mar 23 2022||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 30 2022||Brief of respondent Terence B. Tekoh filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 04 2022||Brief amici curiae of California Attorneys for Criminal Justice and Professor Charles D. Weisselberg filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2022||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2022||Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2022||Brief amici curiae of False Confession and Wrongful Conviction Scholars filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2022||Brief amici curiae of The American Civil Liberties Union and Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2022||Brief amici curiae of Historians of Criminal Procedure filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2022||Brief amicus curiae of The National Police Accountability Project filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 08 2022||Reply of petitioner Carlos Vega filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 14 2022||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 20 2022||Argued. For petitioner: Roman Martinez, Washington, D. C.; and Vivek Suri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Paul L. Hoffman, Hermosa Beach, Cal.|
|Jun 23 2022||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Kagan, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer and Sotomayor, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 25 2022||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
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.