|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-666||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2020|
Issues: (1) Whether the Department of Justice has statutory authority to impose notice and access conditions on grantees that accept Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant awards, a program that provides millions of dollars in financial assistance to law enforcement; and (2) whether the department may withhold Byrne JAG funds from the city and county of San Francisco, California for noncompliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373, which generally bars state and local governments from restricting the sharing of “information regarding the citizenship or immigration status ... of any individual” with federal immigration authorities.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 13 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 14, 2020)|
|Nov 19 2020||Motion of City and County of San Francisco to extend the time to file a response from December 14, 2020 to January 13, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 19 2020||Motion of State of California to extend the time to file a response from December 14, 2020 to January 13, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 20 2020||The motions to extend the time to file responses to the peition for a writ of certiorari are granted and the time is extended to and including January 13, 2021, for all respondents.|
|Jan 13 2021||Brief of respondents State of California ex rel. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General in opposition filed.|
|Jan 13 2021||Brief of respondents City and County of San Francisco, California, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jan 27 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.|
|Jan 27 2021||Letter from Robert M. Wilkinson, Acting Attorney General, et al., received.|
|Feb 03 2021||Rescheduled.|
|Feb 10 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/26/2021.|
|Feb 22 2021||Rescheduled.|
|Mar 01 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/5/2021.|
|Mar 04 2021||Joint stipulation to dismiss the case pursuant Rule 46.1 filed.|
|Mar 04 2021||Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.|
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...