Last week the U.S. Supreme Court released its January argument calendar for the 2021-2022 term. The eight cases set for argument range from immigration to campaign finance.
Jan. 10 Gallardo v. Marstiller concerns tort claims and state Medicaid program reimbursement.
“Whether the federal Medicaid Act provides for a state Medicaid program to recover reimbursement for Medicaid’s payment of a beneficiary’s past medical expenses by taking funds from the portion of the beneficiary’s tort recovery that compensates for future medical expenses.”
Jan. 11 Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez concerns the right of non-citizens in immigration detention to a bond hearing.
“Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community.”
Garland v. Gonzalez concerns the right of non-citizens in immigration detention to a bond hearing and the jurisdiction of federal courts to grant certain types of relief in such cases.
“1. Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community.
2. Whether, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (f) (1), the courts below had jurisdiction to grant classwide injunctive relief.”
Jan. 12 Boechler, P.C. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue concerns the time limit to file petitions with the United States Tax Court to review Internal Revenue Service (IRS) determinations.
“Section 6330(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code establishes a 30-day time limit to file a petition for review in the Tax Court of a notice of determination from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. 26 U.S.C. § 6330(d)(1). The question presented is:
“Whether the time limit in Section 6330(d)(1) is a jurisdictional requirement or a claim-processing rule subject to equitable tolling.”
Jan. 18 Shurtleff v. City of Boston concerns religion, government speech, and whether a city flagpole is a public forum.
The case concerns religion, government speech, and whether a city flagpole is a public forum.
Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collections Foundation concerns Foreign Services Immunities Act (FSIA) and Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act (2016) claims.
“Whether a federal court hearing state law claims brought under the FSIA must apply the forum state’s choice-of-law rules to determine what substantive law governs the claims at issue, or whether it may apply federal common law.”
Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate concerns federal election law and political campaign finance rules and spending limits.
- “Whether appellees have standing to challenge the statutory loan-repayment limit.
- “Whether the loan-repayment limit violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.”
Concepcion v. United States concerns sentencing requirements and reductions for drug offenses under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 and the First Step Act.
“Whether, when deciding if it should “impose a reduced sentence” on an individual under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, 21 U.S.C. § 841 note, a district court must or may consider intervening legal and factual developments.”
To date, the court has agreed to hear 49 cases during its 2021-2022 term. Four cases were dismissed and one case was removed from the argument calendar. Eight cases have not yet been scheduled for argument.
Please Support These Patriotic American Owned Businesses