US Supreme Court Docket

Supreme Court Docket

Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | Unscheduled
December 2006 [Download November 27, 2006 Argument Calendar PDF]
[Download January 8, 2007 Argument Calendar PDF]
[Click here for 2005 Docket]
Many documents listed on this page are PDF files that may be viewed using AdobeReader.
Monday, December 4

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, et al.
No. 05-908

Subject:

Equal Protection, Public Schools, Racial Diversity

Questions:

1. How are the Equal Protection rights of public high school students affected by the jurisprudence of Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003)?
   
   
2. Is racial diversity a compelling interest that can justify the use of race in selecting students for admission to public high schools?
   
   
3. May a school district that is not racially segregated and that normally permits a student to attend any high school of her choosing deny a child admission to her chosen school solely because of her race in an effort to achieve a desired racial balance in particular schools, or does such racial balancing violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Decisions:

• U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit Opinion Filed: October 20, 2005
• United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 5, 2006

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket

Briefs:

    Parties

[Coming Soon]

Counsel of Record

For Petitioner Parents Involved
    in Community Schools:

Harry J.F. Korrell
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Seattle, WA

For Respondents Seattle School
    District No. 1, et al.:

Michael F. Madden
Bennett, Bigelow & Leedom, P. S.
Seattle, WA

Crystal D. Meredith, Custodial Parent and Next Friend of Joshua Ryan McDonald v. Jefferson County Board of Education, et al.
No. 05-915

Subject:

Equal Protection, Public Schools, Racial Diversity, Fourteenth Amendment

Questions:

1. Should Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) and Regents of University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 268 (1978) and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003) be overturned and/or misapplied by the Respondent, the Jefferson County Board of Education to use race as the sole factor to assign students to the regular (non-traditional) schools in the Jefferson County Public Schools?
   
   
2. Whether the race-conscious Student Assignment Plan with mechanical and inflexible quota systems of not less than 15% nor greater than 50% of African American students without individually or holistic review of any student, meets the Fourteenth Amendment requirement of the use of race which is a compelling interest narrowly tailored with strict scrutiny.
   
   
3. Did the District Court abuse and/or exceed its remedial judicial authority in maintaining desegregative attractiveness in the Public Schools of Jefferson County, Kentucky?

Decisions:

• U.S. Court of Appeals - 6th Circuit Opinion Filed: July 21, 2005
• United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 5, 2006

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket

Briefs:

• [Coming Soon]

Counsel of Record

For Petitioners Crystal D. Meredith:

Teddy B. Gordon
Louisville, KY

For Respondents Jefferson County
    Board of Education, et al.:

Francis J. Mellen Jr.
Wyatt Tarrant & Combs LLP
Louisville, KY

Tuesday, December 5

Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General v. Luis Alexander Duenas-Alvarez
No. 05-1629

Subject:

Theft, Aggravated Felony, Aiding and Abetting, Immigration and Nationality Act, Immigration Law

Question:

Whether a theft offense, which is an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(43)(G), includes aiding and abetting.

Decisions:

• United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: September 26, 2006

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket

Briefs:

    Parties

• Coming Soon

Counsel of Record

For Petitioner Alberto R. Gonzales:

Paul D. Clement
U.S. Solicitor General
Washington, DC

For Respondents Duenas-Alvarez:

Christopher J. Meade
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr
New York, NY

Rockwell International Corp., et al. v. United States, et al.
No. 05-1272

Subject:

False Claims Act, Original Source, Qui Tam Actions, Appointments and Take Care Clauses

Question:

Whether the Tenth Circuit erred by affirming the entry of judgment in favor of a qui tam relator under the False Claims Act, based on a misinterpretation of the statutory definition of an original source set forth in 31 U.S.C. 3730(e)(4)?

Decisions:

• U.S. Court of Appeals - 10th Circuit, Unpublished Opinion Filed: March 5, 2004
• United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: September 26, 2006

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket

Briefs:

Merits


• Coming Soon

Counsel of Record

For Petitioners Rockwell Int'l:

Maureen E. Mahoney
Latham & Watkins LLP
Washington, DC

For Respondent Stone:

Maria T. Vullo
Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison
New York, NY

For Respondent United States:

Paul D. Clement
U.S. Solicitor General
Washington, DC

 

Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | Unscheduled | Previous Terms

 

To view PDF files listed on this page you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader