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

Argument sitting

March 2019 oral arguments

7 cases across 6 argument daysArguments begin at 10 a.m. Eastern
Six argument days, March 18 to March 27, 2019. One of them has more than one case.

2 cases
Smith v. BerryhillWhether the Appeals Council's decision to reject a disability claim on the ground that the claimant's appeal was untimely is a "final decision" subject to judicial review under Section 405(g).Decided 17-1606Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill1. Whether the district court conducted a proper "holistic" analysis of the majority-minority Virginia House of Delegates districts under the prior decision in this case, Bethune-Hill v. Va. State Bd. of Elections, 137 S. Ct. 788, 799 (2017), even though it ignored a host of evidence, including: a. the overwhelming majority of district lines, which were carried over unchanged from the prior map; b. the geographic location of population disparities, which imposed severe redistricting constraints and directly impacted which voters were moved into and out of the majority-minority districts; and c. the degree of constraint the House's Voting Rights Act compliance goals imposed in implementation, which was minimal. 2. Whether the Bethune-Hill "predominance" test is satisfied merely by a lengthy description of ordinary Voting Rights Act compliance measures. 3. Whether the district court erred in relying on expert analysis it previously rejected as unreliable and irrelevant and expert analysis that lacked any objective or coherent methodology. 4. Whether the district court committed clear error in ignoring the entirety of the House's evidentiary presentation under the guise of credibility determinations unsupported by the record and predicated on expert testimony that should not have been credited or even admitted. 5. Whether Virginia's choice to draw 11 "safe" majority-minority districts of around or above 55% black voting-age population ("BVAP") was narrowly tailored in light of: a. the discretion the Voting Rights Act afforded covered jurisdictions to "choose to create a certain number of 'safe' districts, in which it is highly likely that minority voters will be able to elect the candidate of their choice,"?Decided 18-281

1 case
Cochise Consultancy, Inc. v. United States ex rel. HuntThe question presented is whether a relator in a False Claims Act qui tam action may rely on the statute of limitations in 31 U.S.C. § 3731(b)(2) in a suit in which the United States has declined to intervene and, if so, whether the relator constitutes an "official of the United States" for purposes of Section 3731(b)(2).Decided 18-315

1 case
Flowers v. Mississippi1. WHETHER THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT ERRED IN HOW IT APPLIED BATSON v. KENTUCKY, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) IN THIS CASE. 2. Whether a prosecutor's history of adjudicated purposeful race discrimination may be dismissed as irrelevant when assessing the credibility of his proffered explanations for peremptory strikes against minority prospective jurors?Decided 17-9572

1 case
Dutra Group v. BattertonWhether punitive damages may be awarded to a Jones Act seaman in a personal injury suit alleging a breach of the general maritime duty to provide a seaworthy vessel.Decided 18-266

1 case
Linda H. Lamone, et al., Appellants v. O. John Benisek, et al.Whether federal courts have the authority to decide claims of partisan gerrymandering.Decided 18-726

1 case
Kisor v. Wilkie1. Whether the Court should overrule Auer and Seminole Rock. 2. Alternatively, whether Auer deference should yield to a substantive canon of construction.Decided 18-15