If you’ve been waiting to plan your fall trip to D.C. in hopes that the Supreme Court would hear a political question argument, then you can start making travel plans.
The Supreme Court hearing schedule for October 31 through November 9 on Monday has been released. The twelve cases on the docket range from a State Department political question, to the standard criminal fare. The full schedule is below.
Monday, Oct 31:
Lafler v. Cooper (10-209) -- Is a state habeas petitioner entitled to relief where his counsel deficiently advises him to reject a favorable plea bargain but the defendant is later convicted and sentenced pursuant to a fair trial?
Missouri v. Frye (10-444) - Ordered in tandem with Lafler as the two cases present similar questions.
Tuesday, Nov. 1:
Rehberg v. Paulk (10-788) -- Is a government official who acts as a "complaining witness" by presenting perjured testimony against an innocent citizen entitled to absolute immunity from a claim for civil damages?
Minneci v. Pollard (10-1104) -- Should the Court imply a cause of action under Bivens against individual employees of private companies that contract with the Federal government to provide prison services?
Wednesday, Nov. 2:
Perry v. New Hampshire (10-8974) -- Do the due process protections against unreliable identification evidence apply to all identifications made under suggestive circumstances, or only when the suggestive circumstances were orchestrated by the police?
Gonzalez v. Thaler (10-895) -- What is the timing for federal habeas appeals under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act after a conviction becomes final?
Monday. Nov. 7:
Zivotofsky v. Clinton (10-699) -- Does the "political question doctrine" deprive a federal court of jurisdiction to enforce a federal statute that explicitly directs the Secretary of State how to record the birthplace of an American citizen on a Consular Report of Birth Abroad and on a passport?
Kawashima v. Holder (10-577) -- Can a legal non-citizen be removed for filing a false statement on a tax return?
Tuesday, Nov. 8:
U.S. v. Jones (10-1259) -- Does the warrantless use of a tracking device on respondent's vehicle to monitor its movements on public streets violate the Fourth Amendment?
Smith v. Cain (10-8145) -- What is the probability that a criminal trial outcome would have differed but for the prosecutor's failure to disclose evidence favorable to the accused's defense?
Wednesday, Nov. 9:
National Meat Association v. Harris (10-224) -- Do states have the power to regulate slaughterhouse operations or does the Federal Meat Inspection Act preempt all state authority?
Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp. (10-879) -- Did Congress intend for the Federal Railroad Safety Acts to preempt state law-based tort lawsuits?
Our pick for the early fall Supreme Court hearing schedule? We are particularly interested in the added question in U.S. v. Jones: Did the government violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights by installing a GPS tracking device on his vehicle without a warrant or consent? The Court's decision could substantially affect Fourth Amendment protections for the tech age.