SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 10, 2021

Washington. Andrus further argues that the Texas court’s decision conflicts with “vertical stare decisis,” the principle that lower courts must follow the Supreme Court’s decisions. In June 2020, the Supreme Court issued a summary reversal – meaning it decided the case without merits briefing or oral argument – in Andrus v.

Stare Decisis 94

Stare Decisis Court Court Rules Legal 94

SCOTUSBlog

MARCH 30, 2022

Andrus argues that the Texas court “disregard[ed] this Court’s determinations and legal precedents to strain for a result that it prefers,” and in the process violated “vertical stare decisis,” the principle that lower courts must follow the Supreme Court’s decisions. Issue : Whether the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C.

Stare Decisis 96

Stare Decisis Court Felony Statute 96

SCOTUSBlog

MAY 11, 2022

Both cases present the question whether statutes that authorize appellate courts to review final agency adjudications implicitly strip district courts of jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to those proceedings. The next two relists raise a related question: whether a habeas corpus statute, 28 U.S.C. Federal Trade Commission.

Stare Decisis 78

Stare Decisis Administrative Law Statute Government 78

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 12, 2022

Issue : Whether the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C. relisted after the Jan. 25, March 4, March 18, March 25 and April 1 conferences). Goertz , 21-442. 1983 claim seeking DNA testing of crime-scene evidence begins to run at the end of state-court litigation denying DNA testing, including any appeals (as the U.S.

Stare Decisis 109

Stare Decisis Court Statute Litigation 109

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 20, 2022

Two pending petitions raise the question of the constitutionality of state statutes providing that corporations are deemed to have consented to “general” personal jurisdiction by virtue of having registered to do business in a state. was filed by a plaintiff seeking to enforce a similar registration statute. Returning Relists.

Statute 103

Statute Stare Decisis Court Manufacturing 103

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 2, 2022

The district court held that the federal Quiet Title Act’s 12-year statute of limitations is jurisdictional, concluded that a reasonable landowner would have known that the government had been permitting public use of the road since the 1970s, and dismissed the case. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed. That’s all for this week.

Stare Decisis 84

Stare Decisis Statute Court Government 84

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 27, 2022

Animal Legal Defense Fund , involving the constitutionality of a Kansas statute criminalizing trespass by deception at animal facilities with intent to damage the enterprise. Goertz , involving the question of what statute of limitations state prisoners face when raising claims seeking DNA testing of crime-scene evidence.

Statute 81

Statute Stare Decisis Court Drafting 81