Amy Howe

Nov 25 2020

Court releases January calendar (updated)

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued the calendar for its January argument session. The session will be a relatively quiet one, with only five hours of argument over four days. The justices will not hear argument on two days: Jan. 18, which is a federal holiday observing Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and Jan. 20, when much of the District of Columbia will shut down for the presidential inauguration – and Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath of office across the street from the court.

The cases scheduled for argument during the January session are:

Pham v. Chavez (Jan. 11): Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which generally gives noncitizens the right to a bond hearing, or instead 8 U.S.C. § 1231, which does not, applies to the detention of a noncitizen who is seeking withholding of removal after a prior removal order has been reinstated.

Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski (Jan. 12): Whether the government can moot claims for nominal damages by changing an unconstitutional policy after a lawsuit challenging the policy has been filed.

AMG Capital Management v. Federal Trade Commission (Jan. 13): Whether a provision of the Federal Trade Commission Act that gives the FTC the power to go to district court to seek a permanent injunction to enforce Section 5 of the act, which bars “unfair methods of competition” and “unfair or deceptive acts or practices,” also gives the FTC the power to require defendants to return money that they obtained as a result of their illegal activities.

Federal Communications Commission v. Prometheus Radio Project & National Association of Broadcasters v. Prometheus Radio Project (consolidated for one hour of argument on Jan. 19): A challenge to a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit that blocked changes by the FCC to media ownership rules, such as the commission’s repeal of restrictions on common ownership of newspapers and broadcast stations in the same market.

BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore (Jan. 19): Whether, in the city’s climate-change lawsuit against oil and gas companies, federal law allows a court of appeals to review any issue included in a district court’s order sending a case to state court when the move to state court is based on two statutes, or whether the court of appeals can only review the ground for removal itself.

When the Supreme Court begins its December oral argument session next Monday, it will hear arguments by telephone because of the coronavirus pandemic. The court has not yet announced whether it will hear arguments by telephone in January.

Update (Wednesday, Nov. 25, 11:20 a.m.): The court announced later on Wednesday that the justices would hear oral argument by telephone during the January argument session. Live audio of the oral arguments will be available to the public through a media pool.

This post is 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
  • Supreme Court issues two rulings specifying where challenges to EPA actions on clean air must be filed
  • Court upholds Tennessee’s ban on certain medical treatments for transgender minors
  • Businesses challenge Trump’s tariffs before Supreme Court
More from Amy Howe

Recent Posts

  • Court appears to back legality of HHS preventative care task force
  • Justices take up Texas woman’s claim against USPS
  • Supreme Court considers parents’ efforts to exempt children from books with LGBTQ themes
  • Justices temporarily bar government from removing Venezuelan men under Alien Enemies Act
  • Court hears challenge to ACA preventative-care coverage
Site built and optimized by Sound Strategies