No. 24-6893

Jonathan Taum v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2025-03-31
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-interpretation cruel-and-unusual-punishment eighth-amendment hudson-v-mcmillian prison-guard prisoner-rights
Key Terms:
Punishment
Latest Conference: 2025-05-02
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Ninth Circuit err when it disregarded Petitioner Taum's argument that Hudson v. McMillian was wrongly decided and should be overruled based on Eighth Amendment historical tradition?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

1. Did the Ninth Circuit err when it disregarded Petitioner Taum’s argument that Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992) was wrongly decided and should be overruled as the historical tradition of the Eighth Amendment does not protect a prisoner for injuries inflicted by a prison guard and moreover, the facts of this case do not establish that Petitioner engaged in conduct equivalent to “torture” possibly triggering Eighth Amendment protection? iii PARTIES Jonathan Taum is the petitioner. The United States of America is the respondent.

Docket Entries

2025-05-05
Petition DENIED.
2025-04-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/2/2025.
2025-04-11
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-04-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-03-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 30, 2025)

Attorneys

Jonathan Taum
Lars Robert IsaacsonLaw Office of Lars Robert Isaacson, Petitioner
Lars Robert IsaacsonLaw Office of Lars Robert Isaacson, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
Sarah M. HarrisActing Solicitor General, Respondent