Editor's Note :

close editor's note

Editor's Note :

The Supreme Court will release opinions in argued cases on Friday at 10 a.m. We will begin live-blogging with First Mondays at this link at 9 a.m., where readers can sign up for an email reminder when we start the live blog.
Amy Howe details the 10 argued cases that remain undecided from the October 2017 term in this post.
We're hosting an online symposium on October Term 2017’s separation-of-powers and administrative-law decisions. Contributions are available at this link.

Ben Cheng Petitions to Watch

Posted Tue, September 4th, 2012 11:21 pm

Bio & Post Archive »

Petition of the day

Posted Tue, September 4th, 2012 11:21 pm by Ben Cheng

The petition of the day is:

Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the United States House of Representatives v. Gill

Docket: 12-13
Issue(s): (1) Whether Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, 1 U.S.C. § 7, violates the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment; and (2) whether the court below erred by inventing and applying to Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act a previously unknown standard of equal protection review.

Certiorari stage documents:

Posted in Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives v. Gill, Cases in the Pipeline

Recommended Citation: Ben Cheng, Petition of the day, SCOTUSblog (Sep. 4, 2012, 11:21 PM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/09/petition-of-the-day-327/

Featured Posts

A "view" from the courtroom: Inching toward checkout for the term – Mark Walsh

Opinion analysis: Court expands states’ ability to require internet retailers to collect sales tax – Mark Walsh

Opinion analysis: Justices invalidate civil-service appointments of administrative law judges – Ronald Mann
Email Digest Sign-Up
Receive a daily email digest from Feedburner by entering your email.
Merits Case Pages and Archives

Archives

or

This Week at the Court
On Monday the Supreme Court released orders from the June 14 conference and opinions in argued cases. The justices granted certiorari in five cases: Sturgeon v. Frost, Garza v. Idaho, Lorenzo v. SEC, Timbs v. Indiana and Apple v. Pepper. They also released their decisions in Rosales-Mireles v. United States, Chavez-Meza v. United States, Lozman v. Riviera Beach, Gill v. Whitford and Benisek v. Lamone.
On Thursday, the justices decided Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc., Pereira v. Sessions and Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. United States.
The justices also met for their June 21 conference; our list of “petitions to watch” for that conference is available in this post.
There is a possibility of opinions on Friday at 10 a.m.
Major Cases
- Trump v. Hawaii
  (1) Whether the respondents’ challenge to the president’s suspension of entry of aliens abroad is justiciable; (2) whether the proclamation – which suspends entry, subject to exceptions and case-by-case waivers, of certain categories of aliens abroad from eight countries that do not share adequate information with the United States or that present other risk factors – is a lawful exercise of the president’s authority to suspend entry of aliens abroad; (3) whether the global injunction barring enforcement of the proclamation’s entry suspensions worldwide, except as to nationals of two countries and as to persons without a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States, is impermissibly overbroad; and (4) whether the proclamation violates the establishment clause of the Constitution.
- South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc.
  Quill Corp. v. North Dakota and National Bellas Hess Inc. v. Department of Revenue of Illinois -- which held that a state cannot require an out-of-state seller with no physical presence in the state to collect and remit sales taxes on goods the seller ships to consumers in the state -- are overruled.
- Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31
  Whether Abood v. Detroit Board of Education should be overruled and public-sector “agency shop” arrangements invalidated under the First Amendment.
- Gill v. Whitford
- Carpenter v. United States
  Whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cellphone records revealing the location and movements of a cellphone user over the course of 127 days is permitted by the Fourth Amendment.
- Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
see all this term’s cases »
Recent Decisions
- Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission Securities and Exchange Commission administrative law judges are “officers of the United States,” subject to the Constitution’s appointments clause.
- Pereira v. Sessions A putative notice sent to a nonpermanent resident to appear at a removal proceeding that fails to designate a specific time or place for that proceeding does not end the continuous residence period calculation necessary for possible cancellation of the individual’s removal.
- South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. Quill Corp. v. North Dakota and National Bellas Hess Inc. v. Department of Revenue of Illinois -- which held that a state cannot require an out-of-state seller with no physical presence in the state to collect and remit sales taxes on goods the seller ships to consumers in the state -- are overruled.
- Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. United States Employee stock options are not taxable “compensation” under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act of 1937.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- Arlene's Flowers Inc. v. Washington (1) Whether the creation and sale of custom floral arrangements to celebrate a wedding ceremony is artistic expression, and, if so, whether compelling their creation violates the free speech clause; and (2) whether the compelled creation and sale of custom floral arrangements to celebrate a wedding and attendance of that wedding against one's religious beliefs violates the free exercise clause.
- Bearcomesout v. United States Whether the “separate sovereign” concept actually exists when Congress’s plenary power over Indian tribes and the general erosion of any real tribal sovereignty is amplified by the Northern Cheyenne Tribe’s constitution in such a way that the petitioner’s prosecutions in both tribal and federal court violate the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.
- Biestek v. Berryhill Whether a vocational expert’s testimony can constitute substantial evidence of “other work,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v), available to an applicant for social security benefits on the basis of a disability, when the expert fails upon the applicant’s request to provide the underlying data on which that testimony is premised.
More Petitions »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 63

Cases decided 49

Summary reversals 8

Merits cases granted to date 63

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Full Calendar Submit Event

June 2018

Orders/Opinions
Arguments
Conferences

Events
Holidays
Multiple

Download our App in the Apple Store
First Mondays see all
Videos see all

Justice Thomas gives commencement address

On May 12, Justice Clarence Thomas gave the commencement address at Christendom College in Front Royal, Virginia.

Peabody Award
Awarded the Peabody Award for excellence in electronic media.
Sigma Delta Chi
Awarded the Sigma Delta Chi deadline reporting award for online coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
National Press Club Award
Awarded the National Press Club's Breaking News Award for coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
Silver Gavel Award
Awarded the Silver Gavel Award by the American Bar Association for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system.
American Gavel Award
Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Webby Award
Awarded the Webby Award for excellence on the internet.