No. 21-404
United States v. Washington, et al.
Amici (1)
Experienced Counsel
Tags: contract-workers federal-contract-workers federal-facilities intergovernmental-immunity statutory-interpretation supremacy-clause workers-compensation
Key Terms:
Arbitration SocialSecurity DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Arbitration SocialSecurity DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a state workers' compensation law that applies exclusively to federal contract workers is barred by intergovernmental-immunity or authorized by 40-usc-3172(a)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether 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.” (D)
Docket Entries
2022-07-25
JUDGMENT ISSUED
2022-06-21
Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-404_i5ea.pdf'>opinion</a> for a unanimous Court.
2022-04-18
Argued. For petitioner: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Tera M. Heintz, Deputy Solicitor General, Olympia, Wash.
2022-04-13
Response in opposition to sur-reply in support of suggestion of mootness filed by petitioner United States. (Distributed)
2022-04-11
Sur-reply in support of suggestion of mootness filed by respondents Washington, et al. (Distributed)
2022-04-08
Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)
2022-03-25
Brief of respondents Washington, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2022-03-23
Reply on suggestion of mootness filed by respondents Washington, et al. (Distributed)
2022-03-23
Brief amicus curiae of Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group filed. (Distributed)
2022-03-23
CIRCULATED
2022-03-17
Response in opposition to respondents suggestion of mootness filed by petitioner United States. (Distributed)
2022-03-17
The record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and available on PACER.
2022-03-16
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.
2022-03-15
Suggestion of mootness filed by respondents Washington, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2022-03-15
ARGUMENT SET FOR Monday, April 18, 2022.
2022-02-23
Joint appendix filed. (Statement of cost filed)
2022-02-23
Brief of petitioner United States filed.
2022-01-10
Petition GRANTED.
2021-12-01
Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)
2021-12-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-11-15
Brief of respondents Washington, et al. in opposition filed.
2021-09-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 15, 2021.
2021-09-21
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 14, 2021 to November 15, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-09-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 14, 2021)
Attorneys
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Petitioner
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Petitioner
Washington, et al.
Noah Guzzo Purcell — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Noah Guzzo Purcell — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Tera M. Heintz — Washington State Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Tera M. Heintz — Washington State Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group
Bobby G. Burke — Bobby G. Burke, Esq., Amicus
Bobby G. Burke — Bobby G. Burke, Esq., Amicus