No. 21-1350
Jack Jordan v. Department of Labor, et al.
Response Waived
Experienced Counsel
Tags: administrative-procedure-act agency-sanctions constitution constitutional-precedent free-speech freedom-of-speech judicial-review petition precedent strict-scrutiny
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw FirstAmendment DueProcess
AdministrativeLaw FirstAmendment DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2022-06-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether federal judges are free to flout and violate the APA, Constitution, and precedent
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether, in adjudications under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), federal judges are free to flout and knowingly violate (and help administrative judges flout and knowingly violate) the APA, the U.S. Constitution and this Court’s precedent. 2. Whether agency sanctions for exercising the freedom of speech to criticize agency employees or the right to petition for redress of grievances against agency employees must be subjected to strict scrutiny and supported by clear and convincing evidence of each material fact. ii INDIRECTLY
Docket Entries
2022-06-13
Petition DENIED.
2022-05-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/9/2022.
2022-05-16
Waiver of right of respondent Department of Labor to respond filed.
2022-04-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 16, 2022)
Attorneys
Department of Labor
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Jack Jordan
Jack Revels Tucker Jordan — Jack Jordan, Petitioner
Jack Revels Tucker Jordan — Jack Jordan, Petitioner