Breaking News

Cox v. United States

Share

Consolidated with:

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
16-1017 C.A.A.F. Jan 16, 2018 Jun 22, 2018 N/A Per Curiam OT 2017

Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces erred in holding that petitioners' claims—which asserted that a judge's service on the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review disqualifies him or her from continuing to serve on either the Army or Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals under 10 U.S.C. § 973(b)(2)(A)(ii)—were moot; (2) whether these judges' service on the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review disqualifies them from continuing to serve on the Army or Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals under 10 U.S.C. § 973(b)(2)(A)(ii); (3) whether the judges' simultaneous service on both the U.S Court of Military Commission Review and the Army or Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals violates the appointments clause; and (4) whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review this case and Dalmazzi v. United States under 28 U.S.C. § 1259(3).

Judgment: The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted in a per curiam opinion on June 22, 2018.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Feb 21 2017Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 27, 2017)
Mar 22 2017Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 26, 2017.
Apr 19 2017Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including May 15, 2017.
May 15 2017Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
May 19 2017Reply of petitioner Laith G. Cox filed. VIDED.
Sep 06 2017DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/25/2017.
Sep 28 2017Petition GRANTED, and the petitions for writs of certiorari in Nos. 16-961 and 16-1423 are granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. In addition to the questions presented by the petitions, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether this Court has jurisdiction to review the cases in Nos. 16-961 and 16-1017 under 28 U. S. C. § 1259(3).
Nov 07 2017Joint appendix filed. VIDED. (Statement of costs filed)
Nov 07 2017Brief of petitioners filed. VIDED.
Nov 14 2017Brief amicus curiae of Aditya Bamzai in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Nov 17 2017SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, January 16, 2018. VIDED
Nov 22 2017CIRCULATED.
Dec 07 2017Brief of respondent United States filed. VIDED.
Dec 14 2017Motion of Aditya Bamzai for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. VIDED.
Dec 18 2017Record requested from the U.S.C.A for the Armed Forces.
Jan 05 2018Motion of Professor Aditya Bamzai for enlargement of time for oral argument, for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED, and the time is divided as follows: 30 minutes for petitioners, 10 minutes for Professor Aditya Bamzai, and 30 minutes for respondent. VIDED
Jan 05 2018Reply of petitioner Laith G.Cox filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 08 2018Record received from the U.S.C.A. for the Armed Forces. (2 Boxes). Box 2 of 2 is SEALED.
Jan 10 2018Letter of respondent United States filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 16 2018Argued. For petitioners: Stephen I. Vladeck, Austin, Tex. For Professor Aditya Bamzai as amicus curiae: Aditya Bamzai, Charlottesville, VA. For respondent: Brian H. Fletcher, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.
Jun 22 2018Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted. Opinion per curiam.
Jun 25 2018The record from the Department of the Army has been returned.
Jul 24 2018JUDGMENT ISSUED.