Trevino v. Hobbs
Pending Petition
Issue
(1) Whether a voter who is moved into a new district and a legislator whose district is reconfigured by a court-drawn remedial map have standing to challenge that map or the underlying determination of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act liability that caused the remedial map to be drawn; and (2) whether a map drawn to remedy racial vote dilution is subject to strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause when it is race conscious.
Oct 24, 2025Application (25A522) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 25, 2025 to January 24, 2026, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Nov 6, 2025Application (25A522) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until January 24, 2026.
Jan 23, 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 6, 2026)Mar 6, 2026Waiver of right of respondents Susan Soto Palmer, et al. to respond filed.Mar 6, 2026Waiver of right of respondent Steve Hobbs, Washington Secretary of State and State of Washington to respond filed.Mar 17, 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/2/2026.
Mar 25, 2026Response Requested. (Due April 24, 2026)
Apr 8, 2026Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 24, 2026 to June 23, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.Apr 9, 2026Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part and the time is extended to and including June 2, 2026, for all respondents.
Apr 9, 2026Response of Jose Trevino, et al. to motion submitted.Recommended Citation: Trevino v. Hobbs, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/trevino-v-hobbs/