Summary of the Court s Workload, October Term 2009

Similar documents
Summary of the Court s Workload, October Term 2009

Summary of the Court s Workload, October Term 2009

Decided Cases by Final Vote

Index of SCOTUSblog Charts

SCOTUSBLOG MEMORANDUM. Saturday, June 30, Re: End-of-Term Statistical Analysis October Term 2011

MEMORANDUM. June 30, From: Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and SCOTUSblog.com Re: End of Term Statistical Analysis October Term 2008

Stat Pack for October Term 2013

Supreme Court Limits Enhanced Attorneys Fees Under Federal Fee-Shifting Laws to

THE STATISTICS. TABLE I a (A) ACTIONS OF INDIVIDUAL JUSTICES

MEMORANDUM. June 26, From: Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and SCOTUSblog.com Re: End of Term Statistical Analysis October Term 2007

SCOTUSblog StatPack OT07, Edition 12

United States Supreme Court Update: Highlights of Recent and Upcoming Decisions. Kirsten M. Castañeda

Jurisdiction. Appointed by the President with the Advice and Consent of the Senate according to Article II, Section 2

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE

Introduction to the Symposium on Judicial Takings

Supreme Court Watch: Recent Decisions And Upcoming CriminalCases For The Docket

May 7, By: Christopher M. Mason, Steven M. Richards and Brian M. Childs

No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States CHARMAINE HAMER, NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF CHICAGO & FANNIE MAE,

The Federal Courts. Chapter 16

Ch.9: The Judicial Branch

STUTSON v. UNITED STATES. on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit

No In The. MOHAMED ALI SAMANTAR, Petitioner, v.

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT and THE JUDICIARY BRANCH

Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court

The Roberts Court and Freedom of Speech

US Supreme Court Year in Review Labor & Employment Law Cases

Stat Pack for October Term 2011

U.S. Court System. The U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington D. C. Diagram of the U.S. Court System

CHAPTER 9. The Judiciary

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:13-cr HLM-WEJ-1. versus

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC Execution Scheduled for September 23, 2008 at 6:00 pm

[Sample Public Presentation]

The Federalist, No. 78

By Jane Lynch and Jared Wagner

The President, the Senate, and the Supreme Court: Teaching the Politics of Separation of Powers

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH: THE FEDERAL COURTS

Supreme Court Review

Arbitration Agreements and Class Actions

Supreme Court of the United States, October Term 2006 Overview

The Supreme Court s Recent Securities Litigation Cases. September 7, 2011

Commerce Clause Doctrine

INTRO TO POLI SCI 11/30/15

Unit 4C STUDY GUIDE. The Judiciary. Use the Constitution to answer questions #1-9. Unless noted, all questions are based on Article III.

Network Derived Domain Maps of the United States Supreme Court:

Selected Criminal-Law Cases in the United States Supreme Court in the Term, and a Look Ahead

McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010)

AP Government Chapter 15 Reading Guide: The Judiciary

The Federal Judiciary

a. Exceptions: Australia, Canada, Germany, India, and a few others B. Debate is over how the Constitution should be interpreted

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER SUPREME COURT INSTITUTE

Developments in Arbitration: Arbitration at the United States Supreme Court October Term 2008 By Sherman Kahn

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

United States Judicial Branch

Selected Rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PREVIEW OF UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASES. Previewing the Court s Entire January Calendar of Cases, including.

Supreme Court October Term 2009 Foreword: Conservative Judicial Activism

6+ Decades of Freedom of Expression in the U.S. Supreme Court

UNITED STATES V. COMSTOCK: JUSTIFYING THE CIVIL COMMITMENT OF SEXUALLY DANGEROUS OFFENDERS

No IN THE. On a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Dunn v. Madison United States Supreme Court. Emma Cummings *

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

LAWRENCE v. FLORIDA: APPLICATIONS FOR POST- CONVICTION RELIEF ARE PENDING UNDER THE AEDPA ONLY UNTIL FINAL JUDGMENT IN STATE COURT

Recent Developments Under National Labor Relations Act

The Judicial Branch. CP Political Systems

Repository Survey - Electronic Disposition Reporting

Supreme Court Finds the Discover Bank Rule Preempted by FAA

C-SPAN SUPREME COURT SURVEY March 23, 2012

Citation: John Harrison, The Unitary Executive and the Scope of Executive Power, 126 Yale L.J. F. 374 ( )

The U.S. Supreme Court 2015 Term: A Play in Three Acts. OSHER Master Class Presentation by Prof. Glenn Smith Friday, July 29, 2016

In the Supreme Court of the United States

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Leon County. Charles A. Francis, Judge.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Terms to Know. In the first column, answer the questions based on what you know before you study. After this lesson, complete the last column.

u.s. Department of Justice

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 6:12-cv DAB. versus. No.

Commercial LitigationAlert

DISCRETIONARY APPEALS

Supreme Court Watch: Recent Decisions of Selected Criminal Cases

OPINION OF INDIVIDUAL JUSTICE IN CHAMBERS. on application for injunction

Committee for Public Counsel Services Public Defender Division Immigration Impact Unit 21 McGrath Highway, Somerville, MA 02143

When Is A Felony Not A Felony?: A New Approach to Challenging Recidivist-Based Charges and Sentencing Enhancements

CASE NO. 1D D

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05- ORCHID ISLAND PROPERTIES, INC., et al., Petitioners,

4.17: SUPREME COURT. AP U. S. Government

Supreme Court of Florida

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH. Article III. The Role of the Federal Court

Litigating the Right of People with Disabilities to Live in the Community

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Petitioner, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida

Chapter 7: The Judicial Branch

AEP v. Connecticut and the Future of the Political Question Doctrine

Why Does Business (Usually) Win in the Roberts Court?

Introduction. REED V. TOWN OF GILBERT, ARIZ. What do we have? What can you do?

2010] THE SUPREME COURT LEADING CASES 219

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday. Good to Know Vocabulary 26. Chapter Executive Notes 30. Presidential Survey Activity 30

Transcription:

Summary of the Court s Workload, October Term 2009 Total cases granted or probable jurisdiction noted: 90: Cases decided summarily (without scheduled argument): 10*; Cases dismissed before oral argument: 1 (Pollitt); Cases decided before oral argument: 2 (McDaniel, Kiyemba)*; Original cases: 2; Petitions for certiorari granted and ultimately argued: 75. Total cases heard for oral argument: 77: Cases decided on the merits: 68*; Cases dismissed as improvidently granted: 2 (Robertson, Sullivan); Cases otherwise dismissed or vacated: 3 (Pottawattamie, Briscoe, Weyhrauch); Cases undecided: 4*. Total merits opinions to date: 80: Signed merits opinions: 68; Unsigned merits opinions: 12. Total expected merits opinions (in all cases marked *): 84. Notes: We count the unsigned opinions in McDaniel v. Brown and Kiyemba v. Obama as merits decisions. We do not regard the following opinions, which are published on the Court s website, as decisions on the merits: Briscoe v. Virginia, Weyhrauch v. United States, Robertson v. United States ex rel. Watson, and Sullivan v. Florida.

Decisions by Final Vote 9-0 (or Unanimous) 38 (48%) 8-1 (or 7-1) 8 (10%) 7-2 13 (16%) 6-3 9 (11%) 5-4 12 (15%)* Corcoran v. Levenhagen (PC) NRG v. Maine Public Utilities Michigan v. Fisher (PC) Hemi Group v. NYC (5-3) Wellons v. Hall (PC) Bobby v. Van Hook (PC) Alvarez v. Smith Bloate v. United States Renico v. Lett S. Carolina v. N. Carolina Wong v. Belmontes (PC) United States v. Stevens Johnson v. United States Abbott v. Abbott Shady Grove Ortho. Porter v. McCollum (PC) United States v. Marcus (7-1) Padilla v. Kentucky Graham v. Sullivan Conkright v. Fromm. (5-3) Beard v. Kindler (8-0) Hamilton v. Lanning Wood v. Allen Carr v. United States Perdue v. Kenny A. Union Pacif. RR v. Loc. Enginrs Dillon v. United States (7-1) Florida v. Powell Barber v. Thomas Stolt-Nielson (5-3) Mohawk v. Carpenter Monsanto v. Geertson (7-1) Graham Cty v. U.S./Wilson Schwab v. Reilly Salazar v. Buono McDaniel v. Brown (PC) Doe v. Reed Presley v. Georgia (PC) Kawasaki v. Regal Beloit Berghuis v. Thompkins Smith v. Spisak Jerman v. Carlisle Humanitarian Law Project Dolan v. United States Kucana v. Holder U.S. v. Comstock New Process Steel v. NLRB Wilkins v. Gaddy (PC) Jefferson v. Upton (PC) Rent-A-Center v. Jackson Thaler v. Haynes (PC) Alabama v. N. Carolina Magwood v. Patterson Hertz Corp. v. Friend Holland v. Florida * Citizens United is included in Maryland v. Shatzer Kiyemba v. Obama (PC) Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick (8-0) the OT08 total. Mac s Shell Service v. Shell Milavetz v. United States United Student Aid v. Espinosa Berghuis v. Smith Jones v. Harris Associates Merck & Co. v. Reynolds Hui v. Castaneda American Needle v. NFL Lewis v. Chicago United States v. O Brien Hardt v. Standard Reliance Samantar v. Yousuf Levin v. Commerce Energy Krupski v. Costa Crociere Astrue v. Ratliff Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder Stop the Beach v. FL Dept. (8-0) City of Ontario v. Quon Morrison v. Australia Bank (8-0) Skilling v. United States Black v. United States Granite Rock v. Teamsters Vacated After Argument Briscoe v. Virginia Past Terms Dismissed Health Care Service v. Pollitt (settled before argument) Pottawattamie County v. McGhee (settled after argument) Sullivan v. Florida (improvidently granted) Robertson v. U.S. ex rel. Watson (improvidently granted) 9-0 (unan.) 8-1 7-2 6-3 5-4 Final OT08 26 (33%) 4 (5%) 13 (16%) 13 (16%) 24 (30%) Final OT07 21 (30%) 6 (8%) 20 (28%) 10 (14%) 14 (20%) Final OT06 28 (38%) 9 (12%) 9 (12%) 3 (4%) 24 (33%) Conkright v. Frommert and Stolt-Nielson S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International are both classified as 5-4 because it seems very likely that, had all nine Justices participated, the vote would have split that way.

Opinion Authors by Sitting Roberts 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 JR 7 Stevens 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 JS 6 Scalia 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 AS 8 Kennedy 1 (plus Citizens) 1 0 1 2 1 1 AK 7 Thomas 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 CT 8 Ginsburg 1 2 2 1 1 1 0 RG 8 Breyer 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 SB 9 Alito 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 SA 7 Sotomayor 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 SS 8 JUSTICE OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL TOTAL Shatzer AS Jones SA Graham Cty JS AL v. NC AS Astrue CT Hamilton SA CLS Mohawk SS Beard JR Merck SB Briscoe PC Lewis AS Levin RG Quon AK Stevens JR Shady Grov AS Milavetz SS Comstock SB HLP JR NLRB JS Dolan SB Johnson AS NRG RG Espinosa CT Abbott AK O Brien AK Kawasaki AK Krupski SS Bloate CT Schwab CT Stop/Beach AS Amer. Needle JS Carr SS Magwood CT Hardt CT Salazar AK Hemi JR Free Enterp. Jerman SS Marcus SB Morrison AS Rent-A-Ctr AS Reed CT Pottawatt. n/a FL v. Powell RG Mac s Shell SA Berghuis/Th AK Renico JR Monsanto SA UnionPac. RG Wood SS Black RG Granite CT Holland SB Dillon SS Doe v. Reed JR Padilla JS Graham AK Weyhrauch PC Berghuis/Sm RG Skilling RG Barber SB Spisak SB Sullivan n/a Stolt-Nielson SA Conkright JR McDonald Carachuri JS SC v. NC SA Bilski Hui SS Robertson n/a Alvarez SB Kucana RG Samantar JS Perdue SA Hertz SB

Frequency in the Majority The charts below measure how frequently each Justice has voted with the majority in October Term 2009 cases decided on the merits thus far. They do not include dismissed cases (Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, Health Care Service Corp. v. Pollitt, Sullivan v. Florida, Robertson v. United States ex rel. Watson); Briscoe v. Virginia and Weyhrauch v. United States, which were vacated after oral argument in one-sentence opinions; or Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which we classify as an October Term 2008 case. They do include twelve per curiam opinions: ten summary dispositions (Corcoran, Bobby, Wong, Porter, Fisher, Presley, Wellons, Thaler, Wilkins, and Jefferson); the reversal before oral argument in McDaniel v. Brown; and Kiyemba v. Obama, which was vacated before oral argument, with an opinion. The first chart includes votes in all cases, the second only in divided cases with at least one dissent. Justice Majority Votes Total Votes Percent in the Majority OT08 OT07 Final Final Roberts 74 80 93% 81% 90% Kennedy 72 80 90% 92% 86% Scalia 71 80 89% 84% 81% Alito 69 78 88% 81% 82% Sotomayor 63 74 85% ----- ----- Thomas 67 80 84% 81% 75% Ginsburg 65 80 81% 70% 75% Breyer 62 79 78% 75% 79% Stevens 59 79 75% 65% 75% Justice Majority Votes Total Votes Percent in the Majority OT08 OT07 Final Final Roberts 36 42 86% 72% 73% Kennedy 34 42 81% 89% 79% Scalia 33 42 79% 76% 65% Alito 32 41 78% 72% 75% Sotomayor 27 38 71% ----- ----- Thomas 29 42 69% 72% 85% Ginsburg 27 42 64% 55% 65% Breyer 24 41 59% 62% 68% Stevens 22 42 52% 47% 65% Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer each wrote a concurrence in part and dissent in part in Alabama v. North Carolina; Justice Thomas joined the Chief Justice s opinion. For these charts, all three of their votes are counted as dissents. For this chart and all others in this document, the case s vote is listed as 7-2, as all substantive parts of the opinion had 7 votes.

Opinion Author Versus Vote Split The chart below displays the number of majority opinions each Justice has written during this Term, excluding Citizens United (which Justice Kennedy authored), according to the size of the majority he or she captured. The unsigned, or per curiam, opinions are listed at the bottom, excluding Briscoe v. Virginia, Weyhrauch v. United States, and the opinions dismissing a case as improvidently granted (Sullivan v. Florida and Robertson v. United States ex rel. Watson). Opinion Author 5-4 6-3 (or 5-3) 7-2 8-1 (or 7-1) 9-0 (or unan.) Total Roberts 1 3 0 2 1 7 Stevens 1 0 2 0 3 6 Scalia 2 0 2 0 4 8 Kennedy 2 3 0 0 2 7 Thomas 1 1 1 0 5 8 Ginsburg 0 0 1 1 6 8 Breyer 1 1 2 2 3 9 Alito 3 0 0 2 2 7 Sotomayor 0 1 2 1 4 8 Per Curiam 1 0 3 0 8 12 Separate Opinion Authorship This chart shows each Justice s concurring opinions, concurring votes, dissenting opinions, and dissenting votes. Dissents and concurrences to all per curiam opinions are included, except when the main opinion dismissed the case as improvidently granted (so far, only Robertson v. United States ex rel. Watson). Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer each wrote a concurrence in part and dissent in part in Alabama v. North Carolina; these are counted as dissents only in the chart below. Opinion Author Concurrences Authored Total Concurring Votes Dissents Authored Total Dissenting Votes Roberts 2 3 3 6 Stevens 10 14 12 20 Scalia 12 15 5 9 Kennedy 7 8 4 8 Thomas 12 17 4 13 Ginsburg 3 7 3 15 Breyer 2 4 6 17 Alito 9 9 6 9 Sotomayor 3 6 3 11

Justice Agreement All Cases Stevens Scalia Kennedy Thomas Ginsburg Breyer Alito Sotomayor Total Cases 44 56% 53 66% 63 79% 53 66% 58 73% 51 65% 60 77% 52 70% Roberts 53 67% 63 79% 68 85% 62 78% 63 79% 58 73% 65 83% 58 78% 80 56 71% 70 88% 71 89% 67 84% 66 83% 60 76% 68 87% 60 81% 23 29% 10 13% 9 11% 13 16% 14 18% 19 24% 10 13% 14 19% 30 38% 47 59% 30 38% 53 67% 53 68% 35 45% 53 73% Stevens 45 57% 56 71% 43 54% 59 75% 60 77% 43 56% 59 81% 79 52 66% 59 75% 49 62% 60 76% 63 81% 49 64% 60 82% 27 34% 20 25% 30 38% 19 24% 15 19% 28 36% 13 18% 49 61% 60 75% 39 49% 36 46% 48 62% 35 47% Scalia 59 74% 70 88% 50 63% 49 62% 56 72% 48 65% 80 65 81% 73 91% 56 70% 54 68% 63 81% 53 72% 15 19% 7 9% 24 30% 25 32% 15 19% 21 28% 46 58% 58 73% 53 67% 57 73% 54 73% Kennedy 55 69% 63 79% 60 76% 63 81% 57 77% 80 60 75% 65 81% 61 77% 67 86% 58 78% 20 25% 15 19% 18 23% 11 14% 16 22% 41 51% 37 47% 50 64% 37 50% Thomas 52 65% 49 62% 59 76% 49 66% 80 KEY Fully Agree Agree in Full or Part Agree in Full, Part, or Judgment only Disagree in Judgment 57 71% 53 67% 65 83% 53 72% 23 29% 26 33% 13 17% 21 28% 63 80% 50 64% 62 84% Ginsburg 66 84% 55 71% 66 89% 80 68 86% 60 77% 66 89% 11 14% 18 23% 8 11% 45 58% 59 81% Breyer 52 68% 64 88% 79 56 73% 65 89% 21 27% 8 11% 43 60% Alito 48 67% 78 52 72% 20 28% Sotomayor 74

Justice Agreement Non-Unanimous Cases SCOTUSblog PRELIMINARY Stats OT09 6.26.10 Stevens Scalia Kennedy Thomas Ginsburg Breyer Alito Sotomayor Total Cases 14 33% 26 62% 29 69% 27 64% 24 57% 18 44% 27 66% 20 53% Roberts 17 40% 30 71% 30 71% 28 67% 26 62% 20 49% 30 73% 22 58% 42 19 45% 32 76% 33 79% 29 69% 28 67% 22 54% 31 76% 24 63% 23 55% 10 24% 9 21% 13 31% 14 33% 19 46% 10 24% 14 37% 9 21% 19 45% 9 21% 22 52% 22 54% 9 22% 22 58% Stevens 14 33% 21 50% 12 29% 23 55% 25 61% 11 27% 25 66% 42 15 36% 22 52% 12 29% 23 55% 26 63% 13 32% 25 66% 27 64% 20 48% 30 71% 19 45% 15 37% 28 68% 13 34% 22 52% 30 71% 14 33% 11 27% 22 54% 11 29% Scalia 25 60% 35 83% 17 40% 15 37% 24 59% 16 42% 42 27 64% 35 83% 18 43% 16 39% 26 63% 17 45% 15 36% 7 17% 24 57% 25 61% 15 37% 21 55% 20 48% 25 60% 20 49% 25 61% 21 55% Kennedy 21 50% 26 62% 22 54% 28 68% 21 55% 42 22 52% 27 64% 23 56% 30 73% 22 58% 20 48% 15 36% 18 44% 11 27% 16 42% 17 40% 13 32% 25 61% 14 37% Thomas 19 45% 15 37% 27 66% 17 45% 42 19 45% 15 37% 28 68% 17 45% KEY Fully Agree Agree in Full or Part Agree in Full, Part, or Judgment only Disagree in Judgment 23 55% 26 63% 13 32% 21 55% 27 66% 19 46% 29 76% Ginsburg 29 71% 21 51% 30 79% 42 30 73% 23 56% 30 79% 11 27% 18 44% 8 21% 14 35% 25 68% Breyer 17 43% 28 76% 41 19 48% 29 78% 21 53% 8 22% 13 35% Alito 15 41% 41 17 46% 20 54% Sotomayor 38

Circuit Scorecard Court Total Decided Outstanding #Aff d %Aff d #Rev d %Rev d #Rev d in Part %Rev d in Part CA1 2 2 0 1 50% 0 0% 1 50% CA2 7 7 0 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% CA3 5 7 0 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% CA4 5 5 0 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% CA5 4 4 0 0 0% 3 75% 1 25% CA6 7 7 0 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% CA7 11* 10 1 1 10% 9 90% 0 0% CA8 3* 3 0 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% CA9 15* 14 1 3 21% 9 64% 2 14% CA10 2 2 0 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% CA11 10 10 0 2 20% 8 80% 0 0% CADC 3* 2 1 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% CAFC 1 0 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% State Courts 7* 7 0 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% Original 2 2 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 84 80 4 15 19% 57 73% 6 8% Summary reversals with substantive opinions are counted (10 total for the full list, see the Frequency in the Majority chart). Orders to vacate the lower court s decision are counted as reversals. Consolidated cases are counted together. Percentages are out of decided cases only; percentages of total cases exclude original cases. *These totals exclude Pottawattamie County v. McGhee (8 th Circuit), Health Care Service Corp. v. Pollitt (7 th Circuit), Sullivan v. Florida (state court), and Robertson v. United States ex rel. Watson (D.C. Circuit), which were dismissed; Briscoe v. Virginia (state court) and Weyhrauch v. United States (9 th Circuit), which were vacated after oral argument; and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (D.C. Circuit), which is an OT08 case.

Grants Per Conference The chart below represents the gradual filling of the docket for each of the last five Terms, broken down by the number of cases granted after each conference. The two steady lines represent the grants the Court would need to have granted by a given conference, if on a steady pace, to docket the number of cases in parentheses by the end of the Term. As of June 21, the Court has granted 31* cases for October Term 2010. Steady (78) 40 OT09 30 OT10 *For this Term, the jurisdictional statement Schwarzenegger v. Plata (09-1233), which the Court agreed to hear after the second June conference, is counted above even though it was not a petition for certiorari. For the OT07 and OT08 lines above, June #1 denotes cases granted after final May conferences, because OT06 and OT07 (the Terms during which those grants were announced) had four conferences in May and only three in June.