- Case: A. J. T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Independent School Dist. No. 279
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Unanimous Court
- Holding: Schoolchildren bringing ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims related to their education are not required to make a heightened showing of “bad faith or gross misjudgment” but instead are subject to the same standards that apply in other disability discrimination contexts.
- Dissent: None.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-249_a86c.pdf
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Unanimous Court
- Holding: Schoolchildren bringing ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims related to their education are not required to make a heightened showing of “bad faith or gross misjudgment” but instead are subject to the same standards that apply in other disability discrimination contexts.
- Dissent: None.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-249_a86c.pdf
🔥22❤8
That is the final opinion of the day, just like last Thursday, the Court released six opinion, SIX. Sounds like the Court is kicking it into gear during the final stretch of opinion days. Come back later this afternoon to find out if next Thursday will be an opinion day. Until then, that's all for today!
👍34🔥8❤4🎉4
JUST IN: Supreme Court will have another opinion day Wednesday June 18, at 10amET.
👍51😁6❤2
Supreme Court Announcements/Decisions
JUST IN: Supreme Court will have another opinion day Wednesday June 18, at 10amET.
Supreme Court has added this Friday as another opinion day this week. Same times both days, we will be here with you as the opinions are announced.
🔥44🙏27👌3
Good Wednesday Morning Everyone!
The justices convene this morning at 10amET to hand down one or more opinions in argued cases this term. We are coming down to the final two weeks of the term, when the justices normally rise for their summer recess. This means the major decisions still having yet to be released could be handed down any day. As always, when the opinion is released, it will be made available here immediately.
The justices convene this morning at 10amET to hand down one or more opinions in argued cases this term. We are coming down to the final two weeks of the term, when the justices normally rise for their summer recess. This means the major decisions still having yet to be released could be handed down any day. As always, when the opinion is released, it will be made available here immediately.
👍45🙏25👌3❤2🔥1
- Case: NRC v. Texas
- Authored by: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson
- Holding:Because Texas and Fasken were not parties to the Commission’s licensing proceeding, they are not ennoscriptd to obtain judicial review of the Commission’s licensing decision.
- Dissent: Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Thomas and Alito.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1300_b97c.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson
- Holding:Because Texas and Fasken were not parties to the Commission’s licensing proceeding, they are not ennoscriptd to obtain judicial review of the Commission’s licensing decision.
- Dissent: Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Thomas and Alito.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1300_b97c.pdf
❤19🤔5🙏3👎1
- Case: EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, L.L.C.
- Authored by: Justice Thomas
- Joined by: Justice Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Jackson.
- Holding: EPA’s denials of small refinery exemption petitions are locally or regionally applicable actions that fall within the “nationwide scope or effect” exception, requiring venue in the D. C. Circuit.
- Dissent: Justice Gorsuch, joined by Chief Justice Roberts.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1229_c0ne.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Thomas
- Joined by: Justice Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Jackson.
- Holding: EPA’s denials of small refinery exemption petitions are locally or regionally applicable actions that fall within the “nationwide scope or effect” exception, requiring venue in the D. C. Circuit.
- Dissent: Justice Gorsuch, joined by Chief Justice Roberts.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1229_c0ne.pdf
🙏13❤6
- Case: Oklahoma v. EPA
- Authored by: Justice Thomas
- Joined by: Justices, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson. Jusitce Gorsuch concurred in the judgment, joined by Chief Justice Roberts.
- Holding: EPA’s disapprovals of the Oklahoma and Utah SIPs are locally or regionally applicable actions reviewable in a regional Circuit.
- Dissent: N/A.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1067_6j36.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Thomas
- Joined by: Justices, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson. Jusitce Gorsuch concurred in the judgment, joined by Chief Justice Roberts.
- Holding: EPA’s disapprovals of the Oklahoma and Utah SIPs are locally or regionally applicable actions reviewable in a regional Circuit.
- Dissent: N/A.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1067_6j36.pdf
🙏19
- Case: United States v. Skrmetti
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Alito joined as to Parts I and II-B. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.
- Holding: Tennessee’s law prohibiting certain medical treatments for transgender minors is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and satisfies
rational basis review.
- Dissent: Justice Sotmayor, joined by Jackson and Kagan. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-477_2cp3.pdf
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Alito joined as to Parts I and II-B. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.
- Holding: Tennessee’s law prohibiting certain medical treatments for transgender minors is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and satisfies
rational basis review.
- Dissent: Justice Sotmayor, joined by Jackson and Kagan. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-477_2cp3.pdf
👏26🙏8🏆6❤1
Still waiting on more opinion(s) btw, not done....yet.
🔥22🙏5👍4
- Case: Perttu v. Richards
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Justices; Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Jackson.
- Holding: Parties are ennoscriptd to a jury trial on PLRA exhaustion when that issue is intertwined with the merits of a claim that requires a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.
- Dissent: Justice Barrett, joined by Justice Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh joined.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1324_2c83.pdf
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Justices; Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Jackson.
- Holding: Parties are ennoscriptd to a jury trial on PLRA exhaustion when that issue is intertwined with the merits of a claim that requires a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.
- Dissent: Justice Barrett, joined by Justice Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh joined.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1324_2c83.pdf
❤13🙏3
That is the final opinion of the day, since tomorrow is a federally recognized holiday, the Court will be back Friday for more opinions in argued cases. Have a great day everyone!
👍26🥱10❤6🙏1
Happy Friday Everyone!
It’s another opinion day at the Supreme Court, the last two days we have received six decisions each day. Could we have that many today? We will have to find out later this morning at 10amET.
ICYMI: The justices will also be releasing opinions next Thursday, which is also technically their last *regularly* scheduled conference day. This means that the end of the term (when it comes to releasing argued case decisions) is nearing. The justices will schedule a final conference day when the final opinion day happens, which is known as the “left over conference” as the court generally cleans up remaining petitions and summary dispositions.
As always, we will bring you the decisions when they are released on the website. See you at 10amET.
It’s another opinion day at the Supreme Court, the last two days we have received six decisions each day. Could we have that many today? We will have to find out later this morning at 10amET.
ICYMI: The justices will also be releasing opinions next Thursday, which is also technically their last *regularly* scheduled conference day. This means that the end of the term (when it comes to releasing argued case decisions) is nearing. The justices will schedule a final conference day when the final opinion day happens, which is known as the “left over conference” as the court generally cleans up remaining petitions and summary dispositions.
As always, we will bring you the decisions when they are released on the website. See you at 10amET.
👍43❤9👌1
- Case: FDA v. R. J. Reynolds Vapor Co.
- Authored by: Justice Barrett
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito,Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.
- Holding: Retailers who would sell a new tobacco product if not for the FDA’s denial order may seek judicial review of that order under §387l(a)(1).
- Dissent: Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1187_olp1.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Barrett
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito,Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.
- Holding: Retailers who would sell a new tobacco product if not for the FDA’s denial order may seek judicial review of that order under §387l(a)(1).
- Dissent: Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1187_olp1.pdf
❤18
- Case: Esteras v. United States
- Authored by: Justice Barrett
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kvanaugh, and Jackson.
- Holding: A district court considering whether to revoke a defendant’s term of supervised release may not consider §3553(a)(2)(A), which covers retribution vis-à-vis the defendant’s underlying criminal offense.
- Dissent: Justice Alito, joined by Justice Gorsuch.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-7483_6k4c.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Barrett
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kvanaugh, and Jackson.
- Holding: A district court considering whether to revoke a defendant’s term of supervised release may not consider §3553(a)(2)(A), which covers retribution vis-à-vis the defendant’s underlying criminal offense.
- Dissent: Justice Alito, joined by Justice Gorsuch.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-7483_6k4c.pdf
❤18
- Case: McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp.
- Authored by: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett.
- Holding: The Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency’s interpretation of a statute. District courts must independently determine the law’s meaning under ordinary principles of statutory interpretation while affording appropriate respect
to the agency’s interpretation.
- Dissent: Justice Kagan, joined by Justices; Sotomayor and Jackson.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1226_1a72.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett.
- Holding: The Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency’s interpretation of a statute. District courts must independently determine the law’s meaning under ordinary principles of statutory interpretation while affording appropriate respect
to the agency’s interpretation.
- Dissent: Justice Kagan, joined by Justices; Sotomayor and Jackson.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1226_1a72.pdf
❤20👍5
- Case: Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. EPA
- Authored by: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Barrett.
- Holding: The fuel producers have Article III standing to challenge EPA’s approval of the California regulations.
- Dissent: Justice Sotomayor and Jackson separately dissenting.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-7_8m58.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Kavanaugh
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Barrett.
- Holding: The fuel producers have Article III standing to challenge EPA’s approval of the California regulations.
- Dissent: Justice Sotomayor and Jackson separately dissenting.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-7_8m58.pdf
❤20👍5🙏1
- Case: Stanley v. City of Sanford
- Authored by: Justice Gorsuch
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito, Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
- Holding: To prevail under §12112(a), a plaintiff
must plead and prove that she held or desired a job, and could perform its essential functions with or without reasonable accommodation, at the time of an employer’s alleged act of disability-based discrimination.
- Dissent: Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-997_6579.pdf
- Authored by: Justice Gorsuch
- Joined by: Chief Justice Roberts, Justices; Thomas, Alito, Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
- Holding: To prevail under §12112(a), a plaintiff
must plead and prove that she held or desired a job, and could perform its essential functions with or without reasonable accommodation, at the time of an employer’s alleged act of disability-based discrimination.
- Dissent: Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor.
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-997_6579.pdf
❤17👍2
- Case: Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Justices; Alito, Sotomyaor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Gorsuch joined.
- Holding: The PSJVTA’s personal jurisdiction provision does not violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause because the statute reasonably ties the assertion of jurisdiction over the PLO and PA to conduct involving the United States and implicating sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches.
- Dissent: N/A
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-20_f2bh.pdf
- Authored by: Chief Justice Roberts
- Joined by: Justices; Alito, Sotomyaor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Gorsuch joined.
- Holding: The PSJVTA’s personal jurisdiction provision does not violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause because the statute reasonably ties the assertion of jurisdiction over the PLO and PA to conduct involving the United States and implicating sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches.
- Dissent: N/A
- Link to opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-20_f2bh.pdf
❤16👍1
That is all the opinions for the day. The next scheduled opinion day is Thursday June 26, at 10amET. Until then, have a great weekend everyone!
❤19😢9🤝3👍2
JUST IN: Supreme Court, in an apparent 6-3 vote, allows the Trump administration to continue deportations, regardless of homeland.
Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan and Jackson, dissented. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a1153_l5gm.pdf
Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan and Jackson, dissented. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a1153_l5gm.pdf
❤113👏68🔥20👍6💯5🍾3🙏2