Court sets March arguments schedule
SCOTUS NEWS
The Supreme Court released the schedule for its March argument session Monday, only two days after it denied the Trump administration’s request that they pause the briefing on three cases where the administration intended to look again at the regulations, agency decisions, or actions at issue. The two cases EPA v. Calumet Refining, and Oklahoma v. EPA are now scheduled to be heard in March. Diamond Alternative Energy v. EPA has not yet been scheduled to be heard. The March argument session starts on March 24 and ends on April 2. During that time, the justices will hear arguments in nine cases over six days.
Here is a full list of the cases set for argument during the March argument session:
Louisiana v. Callais (consolidated with Robinson v. Callais) (March 24) – A challenge to a lower court’s decision to strike down a map that created a second majority-Black congressional district in the state.
Riley v. Bondi (March 24) – A dispute over questions relating to the 30-day deadline to seek review of a ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals denying withholding of deportation.
EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining (March 25) – Whether challenges by a group of small oil refineries to the EPA’s denial of their requests for exemptions from the requirements imposed by the Clean Air Act’s Renewable Fuel Standards program must be litigated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Oklahoma v. EPA (consolidated with Pacificorp v. EPA) (March 25) – Whether the EPA’s denial of states’ plans to implement national air quality standards under the Clean Air Act’s “good neighbor” provision can only be brought in the D.C. Circuit.
FCC v. Consumers’ Research (consolidated with SHLB Coalition v. Consumers’ Research) (March 26) – A challenge to a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that invalidated parts of a FCC program to improve internet and phone services in underserved areas. The court of appeals ruled that the program violated the Constitution by improperly delegating Congress’s power to the FCC and the FCC’s power to a private company.
Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission (March 31) – Whether Wisconsin violated the First Amendment when it denied a religious organization a tax exemption that would otherwise be available because the group did not meet the state’s criteria for religious behavior.
Rivers v. Guerrero (March 31) – Whether and in what circumstances the federal law that strictly limits the circumstances in which an inmate can file a second petition for federal post-conviction relief prohibits an inmate from seeking to amend his original petition while it is pending on appeal.
Fuld v. PLO (consolidated with United States v. PLO) (April 1) – Whether a 2019 law that seeks to give U.S. courts the power to hear claims by victims of terrorism against the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of fair treatment.
Kerr v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (April 2) – Whether a South Carolina woman can bring a lawsuit challenging that state’s decision to end Planned Parenthood’s participation in its Medicaid program.
This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.
