CLOSEClose Law.com Menu
 
X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Below are cases to be heard by the Supreme Court in the coming weeks and the lawyers who will argue them. “Docket Watch” appears at the beginning of each two-week argument cycle when the high court hears cases. MONDAY, MARCH 21 • Town of Castle Rock, Colorado v. Jessica Gonzales, Individually and as Next Best Friend of Her Deceased Minor Children, Rebecca Gonzales, Katheryn Gonzales, and Leslie Gonzales No. 04-278 Certiorari to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. Question presented: Whether individuals have a 14th Amendment right to compel enforcement of protective orders under current Supreme Court jurisprudence. For petitioner: John Eastman, Chapman University School of Law, Orange, Calif.; John Elwood, assistant solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. For respondent: Brian Reichel, Broomfield, Colo. • Jon B. Cutter, et al. v. Reginald Wilkinson, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, et al. No. 03-9877 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Question presented: Whether the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which requires the government to establish a compelling interest before placing a burden on prisoners’ right to exercise religion, violates the First Amendment establishment clause. For petitioners: David Goldberger, Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, Columbus, Ohio; and Paul Clement, acting solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. For respondents: Douglas Cole, state solicitor, Columbus, Ohio. TUESDAY, MARCH 22 • Ulysses Tory, et al. v. Johnnie L. Cochran Jr. No. 03-1488 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit. Question presented: In a defamation action, does a permanent injunction preventing future speech on a public figure violate the First Amendment? For petitioners: Erwin Chemerinsky, Duke Law School, Durham, N.C. For respondent: Jonathan Cole, Nemecek & Cole, Sherman Oaks, Calif. • Michael Donald Dodd v. United States No. 04-5286 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Question presented: When does the statute of limitations period begin to run for prisoners seeking to vacate, set aside, or correct their sentences under 28 U.S.C. §2255? For petitioner: Janice Bergmann, assistant federal public defender, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. For respondent: James Feldman, assistant to the solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. MONDAY, MARCH 28 • San Remo Hotel, L.P., et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, California, et al. No. 04-340 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Question presented: Does a state court ruling on a Fifth Amendment takings claim bar a takings claim suit in federal court? For petitioners: Paul Utrecht, San Francisco. For respondents: Seth Waxman, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, Washington, D.C. • Jose Ernesto Medellin v. Doug Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division No. 04-5928 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. Question presented: Whether the United States must apply the International Court of Justice opinion in Avena and Other Mexican Nationals ( Mexico v. United States), which ruled that U.S. courts must review and reconsider, despite failure to raise claim at the trial level, a national’s conviction and sentence after he was arrested without notification of his consular rights in violation of the Vienna Convention. Also, whether the United States must apply the ICJ ruling in the interests of comity and treaty interpretation. For petitioner: Donald Donovan, Debevoise & Plimpton, New York. For respondents: R. Ted Cruz, solicitor general, Austin, Texas; Michael Dreeben, deputy solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for the United States, as amicus curiae). TUESDAY, MARCH 29 • Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al. v. Grokster Ltd., et al. No. 04-480 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Question presented: Whether Grokster and StreamCast are liable for contributory copyright infringement because of their file-sharing services. For petitioners: Donald Verrilli Jr., Jenner & Block, Washington, D.C.; Paul Clement, acting solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for the United States, as amicus curiae). For respondent: Richard Taranto, Farr & Taranto, Washington, D.C. • National Cable & Telecommunications Association, et al. v. Brand X Internet Services, et al. No. 04-277 • Federal Communications Commission and United States v. Brand X Internet Services, et al. No. 04-281 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Question presented: Whether the Federal Communications Commission may declare that cable operators offering high-speed Internet access can provide only “information service,” not “telecommunications service.” For petitioners in 04-277: Paul Cappuccio, Time Warner, New York. For petitioners in 04-281: Thomas Hungar, deputy solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. For respondents: Thomas Goldstein, Goldstein & Howe, Washington, D.C. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30 • Reginald A. Wilkinson, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, et al. v. Charles E. Austin, et al. No. 04-495 Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Question presented: What is the proper test to evaluate the process due to prisoners who seek to avoid placement in a super-maximum prison facility? For petitioners: James Petro, attorney general, Columbus, Ohio; Deanne Maynard, assistant to the solicitor feneral, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for the United States, as amicus curiae). For respondents: Jules Lobel, University of Pittsburgh School of Law, Pittsburgh.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.