Amy Howe

Jan 16 2018

More orders, but no new grants

The Supreme Court issued additional orders this morning from last Friday’s conference. The justices added 12 new cases, for a total of 11 hours of argument, to their calendar for this term last week, but they did not add any new cases today.

After announcing on Friday that they would review a pair of appeals involving allegations of racial gerrymandering in Texas, the justices today announced that they would not review two other redistricting appeals from that state, which involve allegations of partisan gerrymandering. The justices dismissed Texas Democratic Party v. Abbott and Morris v. Texas “for want of jurisdiction” – a move that was somewhat surprising considering that the justices currently have two other partisan-gerrymandering cases (out of Wisconsin and Maryland) on their docket. But the state had urged the court not to take on the Democratic Party’s appeal, telling the justices that the orders at the heart of the Democratic Party’s argument were not final (and therefore cannot be appealed) when they were entered; in any event, the state added, the time to appeal those orders, which were entered four and six years ago, has long since passed. (Hat tip: Steven Mazie) Perhaps signaling that it did not regard the case as even worthy of a response, the state waived its right to oppose the appeal in Morris; both strategies were apparently successful.

The court once again did not act on Hidalgo v. Arizona, a challenge to (among other things) the constitutionality of the death penalty. The justices have now considered the case at several conferences without acting on it.

The justices will meet for another private conference on Friday, January 19. The cases slated for consideration at that conference include the challenge to the latest version of the president’s travel ban. On January 22, the court will begin its winter recess; its next regularly scheduled conference is February 16.

This post was also published on SCOTUSblog.

Amy L Howe
Until September 2016, Amy served as the editor and reporter for SCOTUSblog, a blog devoted to coverage of the Supreme Court of the United States; she continues to serve as an independent contractor and reporter for SCOTUSblog. Before turning to full-time blogging, she served as counsel in over two dozen merits cases at the Supreme Court and argued two cases there. From 2004 until 2011, she co-taught Supreme Court litigation at Stanford Law School; from 2005 until 2013, she co-taught a similar class at Harvard Law School. She has also served as an adjunct professor at American University’s Washington College of Law and Vanderbilt Law School. Amy is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and holds a master’s degree in Arab Studies and a law degree from Georgetown University.
Tweets by @AHoweBlogger
Recent ScotusBlog Posts from Amy
  • Court rules for deaf student in education-law case
  • Parties disagree over court’s power to reach decision in election law case
  • Justices throw out lower-court ruling allowing state court clerk to be sued in parental notification abortion case
More from Amy Howe

Recent Posts

  • Court rules for deaf student in education-law case
  • Parties disagree over court’s power to reach decision in election law case
  • Justices throw out lower-court ruling allowing state court clerk to be sued in parental notification abortion case
  • Justices decline to halt execution of Texas man with intellectual disability claim
  • Justices take up case on federal admiralty law, seek government’s views on two pending petitions
Site built and optimized by Sound Strategies