Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
19-704 | 7th Cir. | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | OT 2019 |
Issues: (1) Whether the Second Amendment allows a local government to prohibit law-abiding residents from possessing and protecting themselves and their families with a class of rifles and ammunition magazines that are “in common use at [this] time” and are not “dangerous and unusual”; and (2) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit’s method of analyzing Second Amendment issues – a three-part test that asks whether a regulation bans (1) weapons that were common at the time of ratification or (2) those that have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia and (3) whether law-abiding citizens retain adequate means of self-defense – is consistent with the Supreme Court’s holding in District of Columbia v. Heller.
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
Nov 27 2019 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 2, 2020) |
Dec 16 2019 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 2, 2020 to February 3, 2020, submitted to The Clerk. |
Dec 18 2019 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 3, 2020. |
Jan 02 2020 | Brief amicus curiae of Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. filed. |
Feb 03 2020 | Brief of respondents Cook County, et al. in opposition filed. |
Feb 17 2020 | Reply of petitioners Matthew D. Wilson, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
Feb 19 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020. |
Apr 27 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/1/2020. |
May 11 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2020. |
May 18 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/21/2020. |
May 22 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/28/2020. |
Jun 01 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020. |
Jun 08 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/11/2020. |
Jun 15 2020 | Petition DENIED. |
NEW: SCOTUS agrees to take up two new cases. Here's the orders list. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030121zor_m6hn.pdf
#SCOTUS grants US v. Vaello-Madero, a challenge to exclusion of Puerto Rico residents from eligibility for Supplemental Social Security Income program, which provides benefits to poor disabled adults & children
Good morning. It’s Monday, and it’s March!
At 9:30 a.m. EST, SCOTUS will release orders from Friday’s conference.
At 10:00, the court will consider an appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges. More from George Quillin & Jeanne Gills.
Justices to consider appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges - SCOTUSblog
The justices continue their light load for the February argument session next week. First up is Monday’s Unite...
www.scotusblog.com
BREAKING: SCOTUS orders California’s Santa Clara County to allow churches to hold indoor services. Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan dissent. Here’s the short shadow docket order.
#SCOTUS grants emergency request from northern California churches to allow indoor worship services pending appeal, says result is "clearly dictated" by recent decision. Kagan dissents, joined by Breyer & Sotomayor: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022621zr_1bo2.pdf
Just in: SCOTUS opinions expected next Thursday.
#SCOTUS website indicates that the Court will release orders from today's conference on Monday morning, March 1, at 9:30 am, with opinions again on Thursday, March 4, at 10 am. Justices will also hear oral arguments next week, including in Arizona voting dispute on Tuesday.
Apparently all the action today at #SCOTUS was not limited to opinion announcements at 10 am. Major new cert. petition filed today challenging Harvard admissions policy. https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1364962610177843210
NEW: Supreme Court asked to outlaw race-based college admissions. Group challenging Harvard admissions policy says it files appeal asking court to over 2003 Grutter decision.
SCOTUS rules against a college student who tried to sue police officers after they mistook him for a criminal suspect and tackled/beat him. The unanimous ruling involves a technical interpretation of the "judgment bar" under the Federal Tort Claims Act. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-546_7mip.pdf
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.