Raper v. O’Malley
Certiorari Denied
Petition for certiorari denied on December 16, 2024.
Issue
Whether, in light of Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, an appointments clause violation persists when a decision by an unconstitutionally appointed administrative law judge is vacated on the merits and remanded to the same judge, who has received a constitutionally valid appointment in the interim.
Aug 22, 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 25, 2024)
Aug 22, 2024Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.
Aug 28, 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 25, 2024 to October 25, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
Aug 29, 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 25, 2024.
Oct 25, 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 25, 2024 to November 8, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
Oct 28, 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 8, 2024.
Nov 8, 2024Brief of respondent Martin J. O'Malley, Commissioner of Social Security in opposition filed.Nov 22, 2024Reply of petitioner Marcus Raper filed. (Distributed)Nov 26, 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/13/2024.
Dec 16, 2024Petition DENIED.
Recommended Citation: Raper v. O’Malley, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/raper-v-omalley/