Welcome to the Jan. 8 edition of Robe & Gavel, Ballotpedia’s newsletter about the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) and other judicial happenings around the U.S.
Did you miss us, dear readers? We are so happy to be back for the first installment of Robe & Gavel for 2024. SCOTUS has kicked off its first sitting of the year in high gear, so there is much to cover. Let’s gavel in!
Follow Ballotpedia on Twitter or subscribe to the Daily Brew for the latest news and analysis.
We #SCOTUS and you can, too!
Grants
SCOTUS has accepted ten new cases to its merits docket since Dec. 8. To date, the court has agreed to hear 56 cases for the 2023-2024 term. SCOTUS dismissed one case after it was accepted. Twenty-six cases have yet to be scheduled for arguments.
Click the links below to learn more about these cases:
- Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and concerns whether the Supreme Court should stay the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Federal “Good Neighbor Plan” for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards regarding reheat furnaces and boilers at iron and steel mills.
- Thornell v. Jones concerns assessing prejudice under Strickland v. Washington. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
- Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, Ohio originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and concerns the Fourth Amendment’s malicious prosecution claims.
- Snyder v. United States concerns 18 U.S.C. § 666, the Fourth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment, and the Speedy Trial Act. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
- Connelly v. Internal Revenue Service concerns the federal estate tax. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
-
Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine concerns whether the defendants had standing to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s 2016 and 2021 approval of the conditions of use of mifepristone. It also concerns whether the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted preliminary injunctive relief properly. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
- A preliminary injunction is a court order that requires a party to do or refrain from doing a specific action until the final judgment.
- Fischer v. United States concerns 18 U.S.C. § 1512. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
- Harrow v. Department of Defense concerns the 60-day deadline in 5 U.S.C. § 7703. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
- Trump v. Anderson concerns the Colorado Supreme Court’s order to exclude former President Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential primary ballot. The case originated from the Colorado Supreme Court.
- Moyle v. United States (consolidated with Idaho v. United States) concerns Idaho’s Defense of Life Act and the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Arguments
The Supreme Court will hear five arguments this week. Click here to read more about SCOTUS’ current term.
Click the links below to learn more about these cases:
Jan. 8
-
Campos-Chaves v. Garland concerns 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a).
- The question presented: “If the government serves an initial notice document that does not include the ‘time and place’ of proceedings, followed by an additional document containing that information, has the government provided notice ‘required under’ and ‘in accordance with paragraph (1) or (2) of section 1229(a)’ such that an immigration court must enter a removal order in absentia and deny a noncitizen’s request to rescind that order?”
-
Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fikre concerns Title 49 United States Code § 114, 44901, 44903, and Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations § 1560.105, 205.
-
The question presented: “Whether respondent’s claims challenging his placement on the No Fly List are moot.”
- A moot issue is one with no practical significance but is academic or hypothetical.
-
The question presented: “Whether respondent’s claims challenging his placement on the No Fly List are moot.”
Jan. 9
-
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California concerns the Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine.
- The question presented: ”Is a permit exaction exempt from the unconstitutional conditions doctrine as applied in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard, Oregon simply because it is authorized by legislation?”
-
Office of the United States Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006, LLC concerns the remedy for discrepancies in Chapter 11 bankruptcy quarterly fees.
- The question presented: “Whether the appropriate remedy for the constitutional uniformity violation found by this Court in Siegel (2021), supra, is to require the United States Trustee to grant retrospective refunds of the increased fees paid by debtors in United States Trustee districts during the period of disuniformity, or is instead either to deem sufficient the prospective remedy adopted by Congress or to require the collection of additional fees from a much smaller number of debtors in Bankruptcy Administrator districts.”
Jan. 10
-
Smith v. Arizona concerns the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment.
- The questions presented: “Whether the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment permits the prosecution in a criminal trial to present testimony by a substitute expert conveying the testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst, on the grounds that (a) the testifying expert offers some independent opinion and the analyst’s statements are offered not for their truth but to explain the expert’s opinion, and (b) the defendant did not independently seek to subpoena the analyst.”
In its October 2022 term, SCOTUS heard arguments in 60 cases. One case was dismissed. Click here to read more about SCOTUS’ previous term.
Opinions
SCOTUS has not issued any opinions since our Dec. 11 edition. The court has issued rulings in one case so far this term.
Upcoming SCOTUS dates
Here are the court’s upcoming dates of interest:
- Jan. 8: SCOTUS will issue orders.
- Jan. 8: SCOTUS will hear arguments in two cases.
- Jan. 9: SCOTUS will hear arguments in two cases.
- Jan. 10: SCOTUS will hear arguments in one case.
- Jan. 12: SCOTUS will conference. A conference is a private meeting of the justices.
Federal court action
Nominations
President Joe Biden (D) has announced five new Article III nominees since our Dec. 11 edition.
- Ann Marie McIff Allen, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah
- Susan Bazis, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska
- Ernesto “Earnest” Gonzalez, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
- Kelly Rankin, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming
- Leon Schydlower, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
The president has announced 200 Article III judicial nominations since taking office on Jan. 20, 2021. For more information on the president’s judicial nominees, click here.
Committee action
On Dec. 7, the Senate Judiciary Committee reported three nominees out of committee.
- Sara Hill, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
- John Russell, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
- Ramona Villagomez Manglona, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands
Confirmations
The Senate has confirmed seven new nominees since Dec.4.
- Irma Ramirez, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- Loren AliKhan, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- Richard Federico, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
- Jerry Edwards Jr., to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
- Brandon Long, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
- John Russell, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
- Sara Hill, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
Vacancies
The federal judiciary currently has 62 vacancies, 63 of which are for lifetime Article III judgeships. As of publication, there were four pending nominations.
According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, there are 29 upcoming vacancies in the federal judiciary, where judges have announced their intention to leave active judicial status.
For more information on judicial vacancies during President Biden’s term, click here.
Do you love judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? We figured you might. Our monthly Federal Vacancy Count monitors all the faces and places moving in, moving out, and moving on in the federal judiciary. Click here for our most current count.
Need a daily fix of judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? Click here for continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.
Or, keep an eye on our list for updates on federal judicial nominations.
Federal courts recent news
- SCOTUS agrees to decide if Donald Trump qualifies for the Colorado ballot
- Chief Justice John Roberts issues 2023 Year-End Report on federal courts
- Chief John Roberts discusses the impact of AI in the judiciary in the 2023 Year-End Report on federal courts
Looking ahead
We’ll be back on Jan. 15 with a new edition of Robe & Gavel. Until then, gaveling out!
Contributions
Myj Saintyl compiled and edited this newsletter, with contributions from Sam Post, and Ellie Mikus.
