Recent Filings and Developments

  • November 8, 2022: Clinic files brief in opposition to certiorari in Oregon v. Harris, involving whether the Wiretap Act’s provision allowing the “principal prosecuting attorney” of a State or political subdivision to obtain wiretaps, also enables deputy prosecutors to do so.
  • November 4, 2022: Clinic files brief in opposition to certiorari in Cleveland County v. Conner, involving the rules for calculating overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
  • November 18, 2022: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Hemphill v. New York, challenging the New York Court of Appeals’ determination that the violation of Mr. Hemphill’s constitutional right to confront adverse witnesses at trial was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • November 10, 2022: Court grants clinic’s petition in Dubin v. United States, concerning the reach of the federal statute criminalizing aggravated identity theft.
  • June 30, 2022: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Dubin v. United States, involving the question whether a person violates the federal “aggravated identity theft” statute whenever he recites someone’s name during the course of committing a covered offense, or whether something more is required.
  • April 28, 2022: Court rules against clinic’s client in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, holding 6-3 that plaintiffs suing for intentional discrimination under federal statues enacted under the Spending Clause cannot recover damages for emotional distress. See coverage in The New York Times.
  • March 24, 2022: Court rules unanimously in Clinic’s favor in Houston Community College System v. Wilson, holding that the First Amendment allows local governmental bodies to issue censures condemning speech of individual members. See coverage in SCOTUSblog and The New York Times.
  • March 11, 2022: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Ibarguen v. New York, involving the ability of social guests in private homes to claim Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
  • January 20, 2022: Court rules 8-1 in favor of clinic’s client in Hemphill v. New York, holding that he did not forfeit his Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him by arguing at trial that another person committed the crime of which he was accused. See coverage in SCOTUSblog.
  • January 10, 2022: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Jam, et al. v. International Finance Corp., involving the question whether the International Organization Immunities Act immunizes the IFC from suit for its commercial activities related to the construction and harmful operation of a power plant in India.
  • December 8, 2021: Clinic files brief for Navajo Nation in Texas v. Haaland and Brackeen v. Haaland, which involve the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act, a federal statute that governs child custody cases involving Indian children.
  • December 2, 2021: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Hardin v. United States, concerning whether a prior conviction under an especially broad statutory rape law triggers the federal sentencing enhancement for a prior conviction relating to “abusive sexual conduct involving a minor.”
  • November 30, 2021: Clinic’s co-counsel presents oral argument in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, contending that persons may recover emotional-distress damages for violations of federal Spending Clause statutes prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, sec, or disability.
  • November 2, 2021: Clinic’s co-counsel presents oral argument in Houston Community College System v. Wilson, maintaining that legislative bodies do not violate the First Amendment by censoring a member in response to that person’s speech.
  • October 6, 2021: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Simko v. United States Steel Corp., involving the administrative prerequisites for filing a suit in federal court alleging the plaintiff was retaliated against for filing a charge of employment discrimination.
  • October 5, 2021: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Hemphill v. New York, involving whether or under what circumstances a criminal defendant can “open the door” to the admission of out-of-court statements that would otherwise violate the Confrontation Clause.
  • August 27, 2021: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Willis v. United States, involving the scope of the “discretionary function” exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act, which immunizes the government from tort liability when satisfied.
  • August 6, 2021: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Knights v. United States, involving whether courts are categorically barred from considering an individual’s race among the totality of the circumstances in deciding whether police officers seized him under the Fourth Amendment.
  • July 8, 2021: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Frasier v. Evans, presenting the question whether an individual against whom police officers retaliate, in violation of the First Amendment, for recording them while conducting official duties in public may sue the officers for damages.
  • June 28, 2021: Court denies the Government’s petition for certiorari in United States v. Cano, leaving intact the lower court’s holding that officers violated the Fourth Amendment when they searched the clinic’s client’s cell phone at the border without any reasonable expectation of finding digital contraband.
  • June 23, 2021: Court rules in favor of clinic’s client in Lange v. California, with a seven-Justice majority adopting the clinic’s proposed Fourth Amendment rule that a police officer’s “hot pursuit” of a suspected misdemeanant does not itself allow a warrantless entry into a home. See coverage on SCOTUSblog and NPR.
  • June 3, 2021: Court rules in favor of clinic’s client in Van Buren v. United States, holding that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act covers only computer hacking, not using information legitimately obtained for an improper purpose. See coverage on SCOTUSblog and The Wall Street Journal.
  • April 26, 2021: Court grants clinic’s petition for certiorari in Houston Community College System v. Wilson, involving whether the First Amendment restricts the ability of an elected governmental body to censure one of its members for disruptive speech.
  • April 20, 2021: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher, with the student team at remote counsel table, delivers oral argument in United States v. Gary, concerning whether defendants who pleaded guilty to a crime without being advised of all of its elements are automatically entitled to have their pleas vacated. See coverage on SCOTUSblog.
  • April 19, 2021: Court grants clinic‘s petition for certiorari in Hemphill v. New York,  involving whether, or under what circumstances, a criminal defendant forfeits his Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him by “opening the door” to evidence otherwise barred by that constitutional provision.
  • February 24, 2021: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Lange v. California, contending that the Fourth Amendment does not categorically allow police officers to enter people’s homes without a warrant, based on “hot pursuit” of someone they believe committed a mere misdemeanor. See coverage on SCOTUSblog and in The New York Times.
  • January 25, 2021: Court denies Solicitor General’s petition for certiorari in United States v. Kane County, leaving in place a decision allowing the clinic’s client, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, to intervene in a lawsuit involving rights of way over public lands.
  • December 8, 2020: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Houston Community College System v. Wilson, presenting the question whether the First Amendment allows a elected body to censure one of its members in response to the member’s speech.
  • December 8, 2020: Clinic files brief in opposition in United States v. Gary, which concerns the ability of defendants who vacate guilty pleas to unlawful possession of firearms that were entered before the Supreme Court held that the Government in such cases much prove knowledge of the status that makes it illegal to possess a firearm.
  • November 30, 2020: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Van Buren v. United States, involving the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. See coverage in The Wall Street Journal and on SCOTUSblog.
  • November 4, 2020: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher delivers oral argument in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, maintaining that the Free Exercise Clause does not give a religious group participating in the City’s foster care program the right to discriminate against same-sex couples who wish to be foster parents.  See coverage in The New York Times and on SCOTUSblog.
  • November 2, 2020: The Court calls for the views of the Solicitor General with respect to the clinic’s petition for certiorari in Cummings v. Premier Rehab, P.L.L.C, which involves whether emotional distress damages are recoverable in federal lawsuits for disability and other forms of discrimination.
  • October 27, 2020: Clinic files brief in opposition to certiorari on behalf of conservation groups in Kane County v. United States, involving the rules governing intervention in civil lawsuits.
  • October 19, 2020: Court grants clinic’s petition for certiorari in Lange v. California, involving whether police officers may enter a private home without a warrant when in “hot pursuit” of a person who officers believe committed a misdemeanor.
  • August 21, 2020: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., involving whether plaintiffs suing under various federal statutes for discrimination may recover damages for emotional distress.
  • July 10, 2020: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Lange v. California, involving whether the Fourth Amendment categorically allows police officers  to enter a private home without a warrant when in “hot pursuit” of someone they suspect of committing a misdemeanor.
  • June 29, 2020: Court rules 5-4 against clinic’s client the U.S. House of Representatives in Selia Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, holding that the federal statute requiring good cause to remove the director of the CFPB violates the constitutional separation of powers.
  • June 18, 2020: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Lieu v. Federal Election Commission, raising the question whether the limits in the Federal Elections Campaign Act on contributions to Super PACs are consistent with the First Amendment.
  • June 16, 2020: Clinic files an application to vacate a stay and a petition for a writ of certiorari in Texas Democratic Party v. Abbott, arguing that state laws limiting the right to vote by mail to those who are 65 or older violates the Twenty-Sixth Amendment’s prohibition against restricting the right to vote based on age.
  • June 15, 2020: Court rules 6-3 for clinic client in Bostock v. Clayton County, holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. See coverage in The New York TimesSCOTUSblog.
  • April 20, 2020: Court rules 6-3 for clinic’s client in Ramos v. Louisiana, holding that the the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid states from allowing juries to convict criminal defendants by nonunanimous votes. See coverage on SCOTUSblog, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal.
  • April 20, 2020: Court grants clinic’s petition for certiorari in Van Buren v. United States, involving the reach of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
  • February 26, 2020: Court rules unanimously in favor of clinic’s client in Holguin-Hernandez v. United States, holding that a criminal defendant need not separately object to the “reasonableness” of his sentence to preserve a claim for appeal that his sentence is too long. See coverage on SCOTUSblog.
  • February 24, 2020: Court denies certiorari in Michigan v. Beck, letting stand a lower court decision in favor of clinic’s client holding that his due process rights were violated by basing his sentence on alleged conduct for which he was acquitted.
  • January 22, 2020: Clinic files amicus brief on behalf of the U.S. House of Representatives in Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, arguing that the for-cause removal protection for the director of the agency comports with the separation of powers.
  • December 30, 2019: Clinic files a brief in opposition in Michigan v. Beck, concerning whether increasing a defendant’s sentence based on alleged conduct for which he was acquitted violates the Due Process Clause or Sixth Amendment’s Jury Trial Clause.
  • December 26, 2019: Clinic files a petition for certiorari in McCoy v. United States, involving whether possession of a small amount of marijuana presumptively gives rise to reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and dangerous, and therefore allows a police officer to conduct a search of the person.
  • December 18, 2019: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Van Buren v. United States, involving the proper reach of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which makes it a crime to “exceed authorized access” on a computer.
  • December 10, 2019: Clinic, through its alumna Kendall Turner, presents oral argument for the petitioner in Holguin-Hernandez v. United States. The case concerns the steps a criminal defendant must take to preserve a claim for appeal that his sentence is too long. See coverage on SCOTUSBlog.
  • October 8, 2019: Clinic instructor Pam Karlan presents oral argument in Bostock v. Clayton County and Altitude Express v. Zarda, contending that Title VII’s ban on employment discrimination “because of sex” encompasses discrimination based on sexual orientation. See coverage in The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and SCOTUSblog.
  • October 7, 2019: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Ramos v. Louisiana, maintaining that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments require jury verdicts to be unanimous to convict a person of crime.  See coverage in The New York Times, Slate, and SCOTUSblog.
  • October 7, 2019: Court grants clinic’s motion to intervene and accepts its brief in opposition in BNSF Railway Co. v. EEOC, arguing on behalf of the job applicant that the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits employers from requiring applicants whom they perceive as having physical impairments to pay for medical tests as a condition of being considered for employment.
  • August 22, 2019: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Jammal v. American Family Ins. Co., involving the rules for determining whether a worker is an “employee” or independent contractor under federal statutes that provide certain rights or protections only to the former.
  • July 15, 2019: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Garner v. Colorado, involving whether the Due Process Clause imposes any check on an eyewitness’s in-court identification of the defendant as the perpetrator when there is substantial reason to doubt the witness would identify the defendant but for the suggestive setting of the courtroom.
  • June 26, 2019: Clinic files merits brief for employee in Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, arguing that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of their sexual orientation.
  • June 8, 2019: Clinic files merits brief for petitioner in Ramos v. Louisiana, maintaining that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments require a unanimous vote for a jury to convict a criminal defendant of a crime.
  • June 3, 2019: Court rules for clinic’s client in Fort Bend County v. Davis, holding that exhausting a Title VII claim before an administrative agency is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit. See coverage in SCOTUSBlog.
  • May 28, 2019: Court rules against clinic’s client in Nieves v. Bartlett, holding under the facts of the case that police officers’ probable cause to arrest him foreclosed his ability to bring a civil rights lawsuit for an unlawful arrest in violation of his First Amendment rights. See coverage in SCOTUSBlog.
  • May 7, 2019: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Peterson v. Linear Controls, Inc., involving the particular types of adverse employment actions that can give rise to a claim for employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  • April 29, 2019: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Hall v. Alabama Secretary of State, involving when a candidate may continue to pursue a lawsuit challenging a ballot-access rule after an election has occurred.
  • February 27, 2019: The Court rules for clinic’s clients in Jam v. International Finance Corp., holding by a 7-1 vote that the International Organizations Immunities Act entitles plaintiffs to sue international organizations under the same terms as they may sue foreign states in this country.  See coverage on SCOTUSblog and The Washington Post.
  • December 10, 2018: Court vacates the court of appeals’ decision in United States v. Sims and remands to the court of appeals to consider an alternative argument the clinic raised.
  • November 27, 2018: Court vacates and remands for further proceedings in Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in which the clinic represented respondent-intervenor the Center for Biological Diversity in defense of the designation of certain private land as “critical habitat” for the dusky gopher frog. See coverage on SCOTUSblog.
  • November 19, 2018: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Cabrera-Rangel v. United States, involving whether, or under what circumstances, a federal court may base a defendant’s sentence on charges for which a jury acquitted him.
  • November 6, 2018: Court unanimously sides with clinic’s clients in Mt. Lemmon Fire District v. Guido, holding that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act applies to states and political subdivisions regardless of size. See coverage on SCOTUSblog.
  • October 31, 2018: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument on behalf of petitioners in Jam v. International Finance Corp., contending the International Organizations Immunities Act allows international organizations to be sued based on commercial activities that sufficiently affect the United States. See coverage on SCOTUSblog.
  • October 9, 2018: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in United States v. Stitt and United States v. Sims, maintaining that prior convictions for burglary do not trigger sentence enhancements under the Armed Career Criminal Act when the state laws giving rise to those convictions cover certain types of vehicles. See coverage on SCOTUSBlog.
  • October 1, 2018: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Mount Lemmon Fire District. v. Guido, contending that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act applies to governmental employers regardless of size. See coverage on SCOTUSBlog.
  • August 23, 2018: Clinic files amicus brief on behalf of former judges and prosecutors in Turner v. United States, urging the Court to grant certiorari to decide whether the Sixth Amendment guarantees a right to counsel for pre-indictment plea negotiations.
  • August 22, 2018: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Chaidez Campos v. United States, involving the circumstances under which the Government is liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the torts of its law enforcement agents.
  • July 23, 2018: Clinic files petition for certiorari in J.B.R. v. United States, involving whether the Due Process Clause forbids the Government from prosecuting someone who was a juvenile at the time of the alleged offense and the offense provides no constitutional punishment for juveniles.
  • July 5, 2018: Clinic files brief on the merits in Mt. Lemmon Fire District v. Guido, arguing that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act applies to all state and political subdivisions, regardless of how many employees they have.
  • June 29, 2018: Clinic files brief on the merits for the Center for Biological Diversity and the Gulf Restoration Network in Weyerhaeuser Co. v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The brief maintains that the government may designate land under the Endangered Species Act as “critical habitat” even if the protected species at issue does not currently live there.
  • June 25, 2018: Court issues its decision in Abbott v. Perez, largely rejecting by a 5-4 vote the clinic’s argument that the State of Texas’s redistricting maps discriminated against Black and Latino voters on the basis of their race.
  • June 22, 2018: Court issues a landmark opinion in Carpenter v. United States, agreeing with the clinic’s argument that law enforcement violates the Fourth Amendment by obtaining a person’s cell site location information from his mobile phone provider without a warrant. See coverage on SCOTUSBlog and The New York Times.
  • June 22, 2018: Court issues its decision in Currier v. Virginia, rejecting by a 5-4 vote the clinic’s argument that a person who agrees to sequential trials retains his right under the Double Jeopardy Clause not to be tried for a crime that requires proving allegations a jury has already rejected.
  • June 18, 2018: Court issues its decision in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, agreeing 8-1 with the clinic’s argument that the existence of probable cause does not bar a civil rights lawsuit against a municipality for ordering an activist arrested in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights. See coverage in The New York Times, SCOTUSBlog and the Miami Herald.
  • June 4, 2018:  The Court issues its decision in Koons v. United States, rejecting the clinic’s argument that federal prisoners whose sentencing guidelines ranges were retroactively lowered are eligible for resentencing even when the trial judge crafted their original sentences only with respect to mandatory minimums and percentage reductions for cooperating with authorities.
  • May 21, 2018: Court grants clinic’s petition for certiorari in Jam v. International Finance Corp., involving the circumstances under which international organizations are entitled to immunity from suit.
  • March 28, 2018: Clinic files brief on the merits for the Mexican American Legislative Caucus and other groups in Abbott v. Perez, arguing that Texas’s current state legislative districts discriminate on the basis of race.
  • March 27, 2017: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Koons v. United States, maintaining that certain federal prisoners sentenced before 2014 for drug offenses are eligible for sentence reductions because the U.S. Sentencing Commission subsequently retroactively lowered their sentencing ranges.  See coverage on SCOTUSblog.
  • February 27, 2018: Clinic instructor Pam Karlan delivers oral argument in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, contending that a First Amendment claim of arrest in retaliation for exercising the right to free speech is not absolutely barred, even if there was probable cause to arrest the speaker. See coverage in The Washington Post and SCOTUSBlog.
  • February 20, 2018: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher delivers oral argument in Currier v. Virginia, contending that criminal defendants who consent to sequential trials retain their protection under the Double Jeopardy Clause against having to defend against allegations for which they have been acquitted. See coverage on SCOTUSBlog.
  • January 22, 2018: Clinic files brief on the merits in Koons v. United States, involving the ability of certain federal prisoners to obtain sentence reductions as a result of the amendments to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines retroactively lowering recommended sentences in drug cases.
  • January 19, 2018: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Jam v. International Finance Corp., involving the circumstances under which international organizations are entitled to immunity from suit.
  • December 27, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in D.T. v. W.G., involving whether adoptive parents have the same constitutional right to direct the custody and control of their children as natural parents have.
  • December 15, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Davenport v. City of Sandy Springs, Georgia, raising the question whether the mootness of claims for prospective relief renders a federal court powerless to decide a claim for nominal damages.
  •  November 29, 2017: Clinic files motion to dismiss or affirm in Abbott v. Perez, arguing that the district court correctly held that several districts comprising Texas’s House of Representatives discriminated against voters of the basis of race.
  •  October 24, 2017: Clinic completes briefing, with co-counsel the ACLU, in Carpenter v. United States, arguing that the Fourth Amendment requires law enforcement officials to procure a warrant before obtaining an individual’s long-term historical location records from cellular service provider.
  • October 16, 2016: Court denies the Government’s petition for certiorari in Sessions v. Larios-Reyes, thereby preserving the Clinic’s client’s victory in the court of appeals holding that his prior conviction was not an “aggravated felony” subjecting him to deportation.
  • October 16, 2017: Court grants the clinic’s petition for certiorari in Currier v. Virginia, involving how the Double Jeopardy Clause to multiple, overlapping criminal charges when they are severed into two trials and the defendant is acquitted at the first.
  • October 11, 2017: Clinic co-director Jeff Fisher presents oral argument in Jesner v. Arab Bank, involving whether the Alien Tort Statute allows claims for violations of international law to be brought against corporations.  See coverage in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.
  • September 7, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, presenting the question whether Title VII’s ban on employment discrimination because of sex encompasses discrimination based on an employee’s sexual orientation.
  • September 5, 2017: Clinic files an amicus brief in Gill v. Whitford on behalf of several law professors, urging the Court to recognize a justiciable cause of action for unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering.
  • August 2, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Blackorby v. BNSF Railway Co., involving the standard for when an employer violates the whistleblower protections of the Federal Railroad Safety Act.
  • July 14, 2017: Clinic files cert petition in Pickering v. Colorado, involving the prosecution’s burden of proof in a criminal case when the defendant raises a defense that would negate an element of the alleged offense.
  • June 30, 2017: SCOTUSBlog runs analysis showing that the Clinic was the most successful law office in the country this past Term in the Court.  The Clinic had a 5-0 record on cases it litigated on the merits.
  • June 28, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, involving whether a First Amendment claim for arrest in retaliation for exercising the right to free speech can succeed if there was probable cause to arrest the speaker.
  • June 22, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Robinson v. United States, involving whether, or under what circumstances, police officers in a state that allows people to carry firearms in public may search a person they have stopped based on their belief that the person may be armed.
  • June 19, 2017: Court rules unanimously in favor of clinic’s client in Packingham v. North Carolina, holding that a state law barring any person on the state’s sex offender registry from accessing any social media website violated the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause. See coverage in the The New York Times and SCOTUSBlog.
  • May 30, 2017: Court rules for clinic’s client in Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, holding that a conviction for statutory rape involving a victim sixteen years or older does not constitute the aggravated felony of “sexual abuse of a minor” under the Immigration and Nationality Act. See coverage in The New York Times and SCOTUSBlog.
  • May 12, 2017: Clinic files brief responding to the State’s petition for certiorari in Connecticut v. Dickson. The case involves how the Due Process Clause’s protections against unreliable evidence apply to in-court identifications of the defendant as the perpetrator.
  • May 8, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Currier v. Virginia, involving whether criminal defendants who consent to sequential trials retain their protection under the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause against having to challenge allegations for which they have been acquitted.
  • March 22, 2017: Court unanimously rules in favor of clinic’s client in Endrew F. v. Douglas County Sch. Dist. RE-1, holding that the IDEA imposes a “markedly more demanding” duty on the school district than the lower court and majority of others around the country had been requiring.” The clinic, in conjunction with Stanford’s Youth and Education Law Project, represented a child with autism, arguing that his school was not providing him with sufficient services to provide a “free appropriate public education” under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. See coverage in The New York Times here and here, and SCOTUSBlog.
  • March 21, 2017: Court rules 6-2 in favor of clinic’s client in Manuel v. City of Joliet, holding that the Fourth Amendment provided a proper basis for bringing a civil rights lawsuit based on such official misconduct. See coverage in SCOTUSBlog.
  • March 6, 2017: Court rules 5-3 in favor of clinic’s client in Peña-Rodríguez v. Colorado, holding that the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury requires courts to consider post-verdict testimony from jurors concerning racial bias from jurors when offered to prove that such bias infected jury deliberations. See coverage here from The New York Times and here from SCOTUSBlog.
  • February 27, 2017: Clinic presents oral argument in two cases: Packingham v. North Carolina, dealing with how the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause applies to social media, and Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, dealing with deportation law. See New York Times coverage of Packingham here, and coverage from The Economist on Esquivel-Quintana here.
  • January 11, 2017: Clinic instructor Jeff Fisher delivers oral argument in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1, involving the level of educational services that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires schools to provide. See coverage in the The New York Times here and here; also see SCOTUSBlog.
  • January 4, 2017: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Garner v. Colorado, concerning whether criminal defendants receive the effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment when the actual grounds for their lawyers’ actions were unreasonable but different lawyers might reasonably have taken the same actions to pursue different ends.
  • December 15, 2015: Clinic files opening brief in Packingham v. North Carolina, involving whether a law banning anyone on the state’s sex offender registry from accessing social media websites violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
  • October 28, 2016: Court grants clinic’s petition for certiorari in Esquivel-Quintana v. Lynch, concerning whether convictions under broad statutory rape laws subject lawful permanent residents of the United States to mandatory deportation.
  • October 11, 2016: Clinic presents oral argument in Peña-Rodríguez v. Colorado, contending that the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury requires courts in criminal cases to consider juror testimony indicating the racial bias infected deliberations.
  • October 6, 2016: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC, presenting the question whether the Alien Tort Statute permits not only individual but also corporate liability for violations of the law of nations.
  • August 22, 2016: Clinic files brief on the merits in Ivy v. Morath, arguing that the State of Texas is violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by requiring all persons under twenty-five who wish to obtain drivers licenses to take a private drivers education course, while at the same time failing to require any such course to accommodate people who are hearing impaired.
  • August 18, 2016: The Solicitor General files amicus brief, at the invitation of the Court, in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School Dist. RE-1, supporting the clinic’s petition for certiorari in this case.
  • July 11, 2016: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Esquivel-Quintana v. Lynch, asking whether convictions under broad statutory rape laws subject lawful permanent residents of the United States to mandatory deportation.
  • May 23, 2016: Court rules 7-1 in favor of the clinic’s client in Green v. Brennan, holding that the time for bringing a constructive discharge claim under federal employment discrimination law does not begin running until the employee serves notice of his resignation. See coverage in SCOTUSblog and The National Law Journal.
  • May 2, 2016: Clinic files brief for petitioner on the merits in Manuel v. City of Joliet, arguing that a person can bring a lawsuit against police officers for violating the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures when they cause the person to be charged with a crime and detained without probable cause.
  • April 4, 2016: Court grant’s clinic’s petition for certiorari in Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, asking whether Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) – colloquially known as the “no-impeachment” rule – is unconstitutional when it bars the admission of statements showing that racial biased comments infected jury deliberations, when offered to show a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.
  • January 13, 2016: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Haberstroh v. Nevada, raising the question whether the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause applies to evidence the prosecution offers during a capital sentencing proceeding to prove the defendant’s eligibility for the death penalty.
  • December 22, 2015: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School Dist. RE-1, involving the level of educational services required to satisfy the requirement of providing a free and appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The Court is expected to announce later in 2016 whether to review the case.
  • November 30, 2015: Court hears oral argument in Green v. Brennan, involving the deadline for filing a “constructive discharge” claim under Title VII. Clinic Co-Director Brian Wolfman argues on behalf of petitioner, a longtime postal employee, with the student team in the courtroom.
  • November 12, 2015: Clinic files amicus brief in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association on behalf of public safety unions, urging the Court to reaffirm the ability of states and localities to require public-employee union members to pay fees that facilitate the union’s collective bargaining activities.
  • November 10, 2015: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, raising the question whether courts may refuse to consider juror testimony demonstrating that racial bias infected jury deliberations in a criminal case, when offered to show a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.
  • November 2, 2015: Clinic files amicus brief in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin on behalf of the Association of American Law Schools, defending law schools’ use of race as a factor in admissions processes.
  • October 5, 2015: Court hears oral argument in OBB Personerverkehr v. Sachs, involving the scope of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act’s “commercial activity” exception. Clinic Co-Director Jeff Fisher argues on behalf of respondent, a California resident injured in Austria while traveling under a ticket she purchased in the United States, with the student team in the courtroom.
  • July 8, 2015: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Glasmann v. Washington, involving the double jeopardy implications when a jury in a criminal case silent regarding a charged crime but finds the defendant guilty of a lesser included offense.
  • July 6, 2015: Clinic files opening brief in Green v. Brennan, involving the deadline for filing an employment discrimination lawsuit under Title VII for “constructive discharge.”
  • June 26, 2015: Court rules in favor of clinic’s clients in Obergefell v. Hodges, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license and recognize marriages between same-sex couples. See coverage in SCOTUSblog and The New York Times.
  • June 16, 2015: Court rules against clinic’s client in Ohio v. Clark, holding that the introduction of a child’s accusation of abuse made to his teacher without subjecting the child to cross-examination did not violate the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. See coverage here.
  • April 26, 2015: Court grant’s clinic’s petition for certiorari in Green v. Donahoe, involving how to calculate the deadline for filing “constructive discharge” claims under the federal anti-discrimination statutes.
  • April 21, 2015: Court rules in favor of clinic’s clients in Oneok, Inc. v. Learjet, holding that the petition for certiorari Natural Gas Act does not preempt state antitrust claims arising from a conspiracy to inflate the retail price of gas. See coverage in JURIST.
  • March 2, 2015: Clinic presents oral argument in Ohio v. Clark, concerning how the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause applies to child witnesses. For coverage, see SCOTUSBlog.
  • February 27, 2015: Clinic files opening brief in Bourke v. Beshear, arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from refusing to issue licenses or recognize marriages between same-sex couples.
  • February 11, 2015: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Nguyen v. North Dakota, involving whether or under what circumstances police officers conduct a “search” under the Fourth Amendment when they trespass in common areas of locked apartment buildings to look for evidence of crime.
  • November 25, 2014: Clinic files certiorari petition in Green v. Donahoe, U.S. Postal Service, raising the issue of when, under federal employment discrimination law, the filing period for an unlawful constructive discharge claim begins to run. For more information and to view the certiorari petition, see SCOTUSBlog.
  • November 21, 2014: Clinic files merits brief for a group of respondents in ONEOK v. Learjet, et al., which involves whether the Natural Gas Act preempts state antitrust claims arising from a conspiracy to inflate the retail price of gas. Argument was heard on January 12, 2015. For more information and to view briefs previously filed in the case, see SCOTUSBlog.
  • November 13, 2014: Clinic files certiorari petition in Nelson v. Wisconsin, presenting the question whether a trial court’s complete denial of a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to testify is amenable to harmless-error analysis.
  • October 6, 2014: The Court issued an order (see p. 39) in favor of the clinic’s clients in Smith v. Bishop, declining without comment to review the lower court’s ruling striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriages. This order was issued along with six others in similarly pending petitions certiorari on the first day of the October 2014 term. Within hours of the announcement, county clerk offices began issuing marriage licenses in Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Utah. See coverage in The New York Times, SCOTUSblog here and here.
  • August 27, 2014: Clinic files brief in Smith v. Bishop, urging the Supreme Court, on behalf of a same-sex couple in Oklahoma, to grant certiorari to decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from banning same-sex marriage. See coverage in The Washington Post and on SCOTUSBlog.
  • June 25, 2014: The Court rules unanimously in favor of the clinic’s client in Riley v. California, holding that police are required to obtain warrants in order to search cell phones of those arrested. See coverage in New York Times, SCOTUSblog.
  • April 28, 2014: Clinic files petition for certiorari in Dunlap v. Idaho, involving whether the Sixth Amendment right to confront adverse witnesses applies to facts the prosecution must prove to establish a defendant’s eligibility for the death penalty.
  • April 21, 2014: Court grants clinic’s petition for certiorari in Heien v. North Carolina, involving whether a police officer’s mistaken understanding of the law can provide the individualized suspicion the Fourth Amendment requires to justify a traffic stop.
  • February 25, 2014: Court rules 6-3 against clinic’s client in Fernandez v. California, holding that the police may search an arrestee’s home based on the consent of a co-tenant even when the arrestee told the police before arrested that he refused such consent. See coverage in The New York Times and SCOTUSBlog.
  • January 17, 2014: Court grants clinic’s cert petition in Riley v. California, presenting the question whether, or under what circumstances, the Fourth Amendment permits the police to conduct a warrantless search of the digital contents of a person’s cell phone seized during an arrest. See coverage in the The New York Times.
  • January 14, 2014: Court rules against clinic’s clients in Daimler AG v. Bauman, holding that a foreign corporation is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction for injuries allegedly incurred outside of this country. See coverage in the New York Times and on SCOTUSblog.