Skip to main content
Supreme Court Case TrackerThe Court, in plain English

Argument sitting

April 2022 oral arguments

5 cases across 5 argument daysArguments begin at 10 a.m. Eastern
Five argument days, April 18 to April 26, 2022. Each has one case.

1 case
United States v. WashingtonWhether a state workers' compensation law that applies exclusively to federal contract workers who perform services at a specified federal facility is barred by principles of intergovernmental immunity, or is instead authorized by 40 U.S.C. 3172(a), which permits the application of state workers' compensation laws to federal facilities "in the same way and to the same extent as if the premises were under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State."?Decided 21-404

1 case
Kemp v. United StatesWhether Rule 60(b)(1) authorizes relief based on a district court ’ s error of law.Decided 21-5726

1 case
Vega v. TekohWhether a plaintiff may state a claim for relief against a law enforcement officer under Section 1983 based simply on an officer's failure to provide the warnings prescribed in Miranda.Decided 21-499

1 case
Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist.Is a public school employee’s prayer during school sports activities protected speech, and if so, can the public school employer prohibit it to avoid violating the Establishment Clause?Decided 21-418

1 case
Shoop v. Twyford1. 28 U.S.C. §2241(c) allows federal courts to issue a writ of habeas corpus ordering the transportation of a state prisoner only when necessary to bring the inmate into court to testify or for trial. It forbids courts from using the writ of habeas corpus to order a state prisoner's transportation for any other reason. May federal courts evade this prohibition by using the All Writs Act to order the transportation of state prisoners for reasons not enumerated in §2241(c)? 2. Before a court grants an order allowing a habeas petitioner to develop new evidence, must it determine whether the evidence could aid the petitioner in proving his entitlement to habeas relief, and whether the evidence may permissibly be considered by a habeas court?Decided 21-511