No. 19-8252

Roscoe Chambers v. William Hardy, et al.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-04-14
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-law civil-procedure civil-rights due-process preemption regulations
Latest Conference: 2020-05-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the District Court can overlook regulations as preempting claims of due process rights

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED District Couct ean overlook Regulations QS pb theber Pe mn Frenging dn Dac pmees of [aw rGhty, Tf ous” 9) Whe fhe Coded Lede Regulates are law5, 7

Docket Entries

2020-05-18
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2020-04-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2020.
2020-04-16
Waiver of right of respondents William Hardy, et al. to respond filed.
Main Document
2020-03-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 14, 2020)
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisPetitionAppendixProof of Service

Attorneys

Roscoe Chambers
Roscoe Chambers — Petitioner
Roscoe Chambers — Petitioner
William Hardy, et al.
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent