Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our live blog, sponsored by Casetext. Thanks for joining us.
We expect orders from last week's conference in just a few minutes, followed by opinions in argued cases at 10 am.
The justices had a lot of petitions to consider at last week's conference -- the Second Amendment cases and the qualified immunity cases again, along with a new immigration case (Niz-Chavez v. Barr) that looks like a very good candidate for a grant.
Will this be the day for an order in either qualified immunity or the Second Amendment cases? That is a popular question in the comments. I feel like we should get at least one of them this week, but I am so often wrong.
And then of course we also have Andrus v. Texas, a capital case, and US v. California, the "sanctuary state" case, that have been around forever.
Good morning, all. We can discuss the 10-minute interval for opinions after orders.
Hitting refresh on my iPad now.
There is one grant, in Niz-Chavez v. Barr.
This is a case about the "stop-time rule" for immigration cases.
Basically if an immigrant has a continuous physical presence in the US for a certain amount of time, he may be eligible for discretionary relief from removal in some circumstances. But the government can stop the immigrant from accruing that time while deportation proceedings are pending by serving a notice to appear.
The case is about whether the government provide all of the information in the notice to appear in one document.
Seems like no action on Second Amendment or qualified immunity cases.
There is a denial of cert. in St. Hubert v. United States, a case involving whether the petitioner's Hobbs Act conviction is a "crime of violence." Justice Sotomayor has an opinion respecting the denial.
Not seeing a whole lot else here. We'll know later today whether the Second Amendment and qualified immunity cases were relisted; I imagine that they were, but am really not sure what is going on with them. I look forward to getting John Elwood's take.
I've been sorting through the qualified immunity petitions for a story I'm working on, and I can see why the court may be taking extra time to vet possible grants.
Regarding opinion releases, remember that we are not getting opinion summaries from the authors of the majority opinions, as we normally would in the courtroom. The justices may be composing these for the heck of it and delivering them to their family members or pets at home, but we will never hear them. And as mentioned below, no oral dissents either.
As you will see on my list of remaining cases, there are not a lot of "low-profile" opinions left to decide this term.
Just to be clear, especially for those of you who are new or new-ish here. We don't know what cases we're getting today. I think it's likely too soon for anything from the May sitting, though. If I had to bet, and I don't bet, I'd pick either Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez, Liu v. SEC, or Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue.
Submit Event
