ITS OPINION DAY - For some clarity, opinion day is like Christmas morning for Supreme Court reporters, only the big gifts come during the month of June. Any case argued between October- December is up for grabs this morning. Should we expect a decision on President Trump’s tariffs or the controversial redistricting case that was reargued this term? No, but they could be released this morning, anything is possible at the Supreme Court. We’ll be here at 10amET to forward the decisions when they are released to the website.
1🙏55🔥9👍7❤1
- Case: Bowe v. United States
- Author of Opinion: Justice Sotomayor
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Jackson.
- Dissented: Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Thomas and Alito, and Barrett joined only as to part one.
- Holding: The Court has jurisdiction because §2244(b)(3)(E) does not bar this Court’s review of a federal prisoner’s request to file a second or successive §2255 motion
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-5438_o7kq.pdf
That’s all for today folks! (Told you, the first ones aren’t always that exciting).
- Author of Opinion: Justice Sotomayor
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Jackson.
- Dissented: Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Thomas and Alito, and Barrett joined only as to part one.
- Holding: The Court has jurisdiction because §2244(b)(3)(E) does not bar this Court’s review of a federal prisoner’s request to file a second or successive §2255 motion
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-5438_o7kq.pdf
That’s all for today folks! (Told you, the first ones aren’t always that exciting).
👍17❤5🔥1
REMINDER - The biggest anticipation this week was that the Supreme Court would rule on the widely anticipated tariffs case. Please be vigilant when it comes to seeing online predictions, there is no “likely” when it comes to early Supreme Court opinion days for certain cases, especially ones of high magnitude. As we said in the past, nobody knows what opinions will come until the very second they are announced from the bench on opinion day. The only exception to this is the last day of opinions, when the pool of cases are so narrowed that reasonable expectations can be established.
❤40🔥7👍2
JUST IN - Supreme Court to release one or more opinions in argued cases this term on Wednesday Jan 14.
😴29👀16❤9👍4🙏3
Good Monday Morning Everyone!
What’s that we hear? It’s the sound of oral arguments, or a noisy neighbor, who knows. Today the justices begin their January sitting, which is PACKED with cases that will likely interest you, let’s dive right in.
First and only case up for oral argument today - Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish. If you’re someone interested in the oil industry, this will be the case to listen to. Adding to it, Justice Alito has recused himself from the case, citing financial ties.
You know the drill, unless you’re new here, if you’re interested in hearing oral arguments today, here’s a link for you: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
What’s that we hear? It’s the sound of oral arguments, or a noisy neighbor, who knows. Today the justices begin their January sitting, which is PACKED with cases that will likely interest you, let’s dive right in.
First and only case up for oral argument today - Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish. If you’re someone interested in the oil industry, this will be the case to listen to. Adding to it, Justice Alito has recused himself from the case, citing financial ties.
You know the drill, unless you’re new here, if you’re interested in hearing oral arguments today, here’s a link for you: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
1👍54❤7🔥2👀2✍1
Happy Tuesday Everyone!
It’s a BIG day at the Supreme Court, there are only a handful of very controversial cases this term, two of which are set to be argued this morning, so let’s dive in.
First case up to bat - Little v. Hecox, a controversial case involving biological men playing in women sports. The case will decide whether a law that prohibits transgender women (born male) from competing in biological women’s sports violates the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th amendment.
Second case up to bat - West Virginia v. B. P. J., a case with a different name, different back story, but same dilemma as the first case.
Arguments for the first case begin at 10 AM ET, here is a link to listen to the arguments or you can visit YouTube and listen to it via a participating network: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
It’s a BIG day at the Supreme Court, there are only a handful of very controversial cases this term, two of which are set to be argued this morning, so let’s dive in.
First case up to bat - Little v. Hecox, a controversial case involving biological men playing in women sports. The case will decide whether a law that prohibits transgender women (born male) from competing in biological women’s sports violates the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th amendment.
Second case up to bat - West Virginia v. B. P. J., a case with a different name, different back story, but same dilemma as the first case.
Arguments for the first case begin at 10 AM ET, here is a link to listen to the arguments or you can visit YouTube and listen to it via a participating network: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
👍50❤10🥱3
It’s Wednesday Morning Everyone!
Yesterday was a huge oral argument day, so the justices are calming things down today with a set of consolidated cases.
First we will start with the justices announcing one or more opinions in argued cases this term. We don’t know which ones will be released but we will send them here when we do.
Second, the Court will hear arguments in Galette v. NJ Transit Corp. and NJ Transit Corp. v. Colt, cases consolidated that involve interstate sovereign immunity, and conflicting high court rulings.
Arguments begin at 10amET, join in to listen live: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
Yesterday was a huge oral argument day, so the justices are calming things down today with a set of consolidated cases.
First we will start with the justices announcing one or more opinions in argued cases this term. We don’t know which ones will be released but we will send them here when we do.
Second, the Court will hear arguments in Galette v. NJ Transit Corp. and NJ Transit Corp. v. Colt, cases consolidated that involve interstate sovereign immunity, and conflicting high court rulings.
Arguments begin at 10amET, join in to listen live: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
❤28👍12👀4🥱1
- Case: Barrett v. United States
- Author of Opinion: Justice Jackson
- Joined by: Unanimous with concurrences.
-Dissented: None.
- Holding: Congress did not clearly authorize convictions under both
§§924(c)(1)(A)(i) and (j) for a single act that violates both provisions.
One act that violates both provisions therefore may spawn only one conviction. The part of the Second Circuit’s judgment that held otherwise is reversed.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-5774_9nbe.pdf
- Author of Opinion: Justice Jackson
- Joined by: Unanimous with concurrences.
-Dissented: None.
- Holding: Congress did not clearly authorize convictions under both
§§924(c)(1)(A)(i) and (j) for a single act that violates both provisions.
One act that violates both provisions therefore may spawn only one conviction. The part of the Second Circuit’s judgment that held otherwise is reversed.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-5774_9nbe.pdf
❤19🔥5
- Case: Case v. Montana
- Author of Opinion: Justice Kagan
- Joined by: Unanimous with concurrences.
- Dissented: None.
- Holding: Brigham City’s objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid applies without further gloss and was satisfied in this case.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-624_b07d.pdf
- Author of Opinion: Justice Kagan
- Joined by: Unanimous with concurrences.
- Dissented: None.
- Holding: Brigham City’s objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid applies without further gloss and was satisfied in this case.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-624_b07d.pdf
❤19
- Case: Bost v. Illinois Board of Elections.
- Author of Opinion: Chief Justice Roberts.
- Joined by: Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Justice Barrett, joined by Justice Kagan filed an opinion concurring in the judgement.
- Dissented: Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor.
- Holding: As a candidate for office, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-568_gfbh.pdf
- Author of Opinion: Chief Justice Roberts.
- Joined by: Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Justice Barrett, joined by Justice Kagan filed an opinion concurring in the judgement.
- Dissented: Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor.
- Holding: As a candidate for office, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-568_gfbh.pdf
🙏34💯15❤5🔥2
As a reminder, we don’t know what opinions will come on certain days because they are not announced ahead of time. There was a lot of speculation and confusion regarding why the Supreme Court has not announced a decision on the widely anticipated tariffs case. Simply put, nobody knows when it will be released, there is no insider knowledge. This is why we are always consistent. When we say we don’t know what opinions will come, we don’t speculate to you about which opinions will be released. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them. We just want to make sure that everybody is on the same page and that there is no confusion regarding this matter.
👍57❤11🙏3🔥1🤨1
JUST IN - Supreme Court will release one or more opinions in argued cases on Tuesday Jan. 20.
1❤48👀24👍6🤡3🥱1🆒1
Good Tuesday Morning Everyone!
It’s yet another opinion day at the Supreme Court, the justices will announce one or more opinions in argued cases so far this term. As we’ve said before, we don’t know which cases will be released, but we will be sure to send them here when they are.
Following that, the justices will hear one case for oral argument:
Wilford v. Lopez - This involves a Hawaii law that prohibits firearms from private property open to the public, with the exception of expressly given permission from property owners.
If this case interests you, you can listen live with the link below or you can search YouTube for a comparable version from a participating network: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
It’s yet another opinion day at the Supreme Court, the justices will announce one or more opinions in argued cases so far this term. As we’ve said before, we don’t know which cases will be released, but we will be sure to send them here when they are.
Following that, the justices will hear one case for oral argument:
Wilford v. Lopez - This involves a Hawaii law that prohibits firearms from private property open to the public, with the exception of expressly given permission from property owners.
If this case interests you, you can listen live with the link below or you can search YouTube for a comparable version from a participating network: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
👍20🙏5🥱1
- Case: Berk v. Choy
- Author of Opinion: Justice Barrett
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Justice Jackson filed an opinion concurring in the judgement.
-Dissented: none.
- Holding: Delaware’s affidavit law does not apply in federal court.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-440_1b82.pdf
- Author of Opinion: Justice Barrett
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Justice Jackson filed an opinion concurring in the judgement.
-Dissented: none.
- Holding: Delaware’s affidavit law does not apply in federal court.
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-440_1b82.pdf
❤18🔥3
- Case: Ellingburg v. United States
- Author of Opinion: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Unanimous
-Dissented: None.
- Holding: Restitution under the MVRA is plainly criminal punishment for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause. Whether a law violates the Ex Post Facto Clause requires evaluating whether the law imposes a criminal or penal sanction as opposed to a civil remedy. That question is one “of statutory construction” that requires the Court to “consider
the statute’s text and its structure.” Smith v. Doe, 538 U. S. 84, 92
(quotation marks omitted).
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-482_d1oe.pdf
- Author of Opinion: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Unanimous
-Dissented: None.
- Holding: Restitution under the MVRA is plainly criminal punishment for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause. Whether a law violates the Ex Post Facto Clause requires evaluating whether the law imposes a criminal or penal sanction as opposed to a civil remedy. That question is one “of statutory construction” that requires the Court to “consider
the statute’s text and its structure.” Smith v. Doe, 538 U. S. 84, 92
(quotation marks omitted).
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-482_d1oe.pdf
❤18🔥3
- Case: Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton
- Author of Opinion: Justice Alito
- Joined by: Unanimous
- Dissented: None.
- Holding: Rule 60(c)(1)’s reasonable-time limit applies to a motion alleging that a judgment is void under Rule 60(b)(4).
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-808_lkgn.pdf
- Author of Opinion: Justice Alito
- Joined by: Unanimous
- Dissented: None.
- Holding: Rule 60(c)(1)’s reasonable-time limit applies to a motion alleging that a judgment is void under Rule 60(b)(4).
- Link to Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-808_lkgn.pdf
❤12🔥4
Good Wednesday Morning Everyone!
Today the justices will sit for one case for oral argument. There is no opinion announcements this morning.
Trump v. Cook - A case involving whether to put on hold a lower court decision that barred President Trump from firing Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, for alleged misconduct.
Arguments begin at 10amET, here is a link to listen live or you can search YouTube for a stream from a participating network: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
Today the justices will sit for one case for oral argument. There is no opinion announcements this morning.
Trump v. Cook - A case involving whether to put on hold a lower court decision that barred President Trump from firing Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, for alleged misconduct.
Arguments begin at 10amET, here is a link to listen live or you can search YouTube for a stream from a participating network: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx
🙏50👍13❤6⚡1