Supreme Court of the United States
 
ELECTRONIC FILING NOW OPEN - Click to Learn More   

Today at the Court - Friday, Feb 23, 2018


  • The Supreme Court Building is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
  • The Justices will meet in a private conference to discuss cases and vote on petitions for review.
  • The Court will release an order list at 9:30 a.m. on Monday, February 26.
  • The Court may announce opinions on Tuesday, February 27.
  • The Court will next convene for a public session in the Courtroom at 10 a.m. on Monday, February 26.
  • Courtroom Lectures available within the next 30 days.
Calendar
Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<<February 2018><<
February 2018
SMTWTFS
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18
 
2021222324
25262728   
       
Calendar Info/Key

 


Oral Arguments

Week of Monday, February 19



Tuesday, February 20
       
Currier v. Virginia (16-1348)
       
City of Hays v. Vogt (16-1495)


Wednesday, February 21
       
Rosales-Mireles v. United States (16-9493)
       
Dahda v. United States (17-43)


The transcripts of oral arguments are posted on this website on the same day an argument is heard by the Court. Same-day transcripts are considered official but subject to final review. The audio recordings of all oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court of the United States are available to the public at the end of each argument week. The audio recordings are posted on Fridays after Conference.


Earlier Transcripts | Earlier Audio

Recent Decisions


February 21, 2018
         
Murphy v. Smith (16-1067)
In cases governed by 42 U. S. C. §1997e(d), which provides that “a portion of [a prevailing prisoner’s civil rights] judgment (not to exceed 25 percent) shall be applied to satisfy the amount of attorney’s fees awarded against the defendant,” district courts must apply as much of the judgment as necessary, up to 25%, to satisfy the award.

         
Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran (16-534)
Title 28 U. S. C. §1610(g) does not provide a freestanding basis for parties holding a judgment against a state sponsor of terrorism for an act of terrorism, see §1605A, to attach and execute against the foreign state’s property; rather, for §1610(g) to apply, the property’s immunity must be rescinded under a separate provision within §1610.

         
Class v. United States (16-424)
A guilty plea, by itself, does not bar a federal criminal defendant from challenging the constitutionality of his statute of conviction on direct appeal.

         
Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers (16-1276)
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act’s anti-retaliation provision does not extend to an individual, like Somers, who has not reported a violation of the securities laws to the Securities and Exchange Commission.



More Opinions...

William Marbury (left), by unknown artist. James Madison (right) by Adrian Lamb, after Gilbert Stuart.
William Marbury (left), by unknown artist. James Madison (right) by Adrian Lamb, after Gilbert Stuart.
Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States


Did You Know...

Marbury v. Madison (1803)


The Supreme Court first exercised judicial review—the power to rule a law unconstitutional—in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803). In 1801, outgoing President John Adams appointed William Marbury to a federal office, but Marbury’s commission went undelivered and the new President, Thomas Jefferson, upon taking office, refused to order it delivered. Marbury sued. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice John Marshall declared that while Marbury was entitled to his commission, the Court lacked the power to order Secretary of State James Madison to deliver it. Unfortunately for Marbury, Marshall explained that the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 authorizing such an order was unconstitutional because it gave the Court a power beyond what was prescribed by the Constitution.

 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543