|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1498||Wash.||Oct 30, 2018||Mar 19, 2019||5-4||Breyer||OT 2018|
Holding: The Supreme Court of Washington’s judgment -- that the “right to travel” provision of the 1855 Treaty Between the United States and the Yakama Nation of Indians pre-empts the state’s fuel tax as applied to Cougar Den’s importation of fuel by public highway for sale within the reservation -- is affirmed.
Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on March 19, 2019. Justice Breyer announced the judgment of the court and delivered an opinion, in which Justices Sotomayor and Kagan joined. Justice Gorsuch filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Ginsburg joined. Chief Justice Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jun 14 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 17, 2017)|
|Jul 13 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 16, 2017.|
|Jul 17 2017||Brief amici curiae of The States of Idaho, et al. filed.|
|Jul 17 2017||Brief amici curiae of Washington Oil Marketers Association, et al. filed.|
|Aug 16 2017||Brief of respondent Cougar Den, Inc. in opposition filed.|
|Aug 16 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation filed.|
|Aug 29 2017||Reply of petitioner Washington State Department of Licensing filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 30 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/25/2017.|
|Oct 02 2017||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|May 15 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|May 29 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.|
|May 30 2018||Supplemental brief of respondent Cougar Den, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 18 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/21/2018.|
|Jun 25 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Aug 09 2018||Brief of petitioner Washington State Department of Licensing filed.|
|Aug 09 2018||Joint appendix filed.|
|Aug 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of The Washington Oil Marketers Association and the Washington Association of Neighborhood Stores filed.|
|Aug 16 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Aug 16 2018||Brief amici curiae of Multistate Tax Commission and Federation of Tax Administrators filed.|
|Aug 16 2018||Brief amici curiae of The States of Idaho, et al. filed.|
|Aug 16 2018||Brief amici curiae of Public Health Organizations filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Motion for an extension of time to file respondent's brief on the merits filed.|
|Aug 20 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 30, 2018|
|Aug 24 2018||Motion to extend the time to file respondent's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including September 17, 2018.|
|Sep 10 2018||Record requested from the Supreme Court of Washington.|
|Sep 12 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 12 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Sacred Ground Legal Services filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 17 2018||Brief of respondent Cougar Den, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 21 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amicus curiae of National Congress of American Indians filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amici curiae of Nez Perce Tribe, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 24 2018||Brief amici curiae of Confederated Tribes and Band of the Yakama Nation filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 09 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.|
|Oct 17 2018||Reply of petitioner Washington State Department of Licensing filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 18 2018||Record received from the Supreme Court of Washington is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Oct 30 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Noah Purcell, Washington State Solicitor General, Olympia, Wash.; and Ann O'Connell, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C.|
|Mar 19 2019||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Breyer, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. Roberts, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Kavanaugh, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined.|
|Apr 22 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Apr 22 2019||MANDATE ISSUED.|
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...
I really enjoyed getting to chat with the incomparable @AHoweBlogger about (1) why #SCOTUS's "shadow docket" *is* a big deal; (2) why it's so hard to figure out how to include it in broader assessments of the Justices' work; and (3) some possible ways to include it going forward. https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1417545384314949635
How do you solve a problem like the shadow docket? @steve_vladeck has some thoughts and shared them with @AHoweBlogger in the latest SCOTUStalk.
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.