Arunachalam v. U.S. Dist. Court for the N. Dist. of Cal.

Supreme Court

Arunachalam v. U.S. Dist. Court for the N. Dist. of Cal.

140 S. Ct. 40, 205 L. Ed. 2d 21

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 7, 2019·No. No. 18-9383·Published

Opinion

Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U.S.C. § 1, and since the qualified Justices are of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment is affirmed under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, which provides that under this circumstances "the court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided court."

Justice Thomas, Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Alito, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U.S.C. § 1, and since the qualified Justices are of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment is affirmed under 28 U.S.C. § 2109, which provides that under this circumstances "the court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided court."

Justice Thomas, Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Alito, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Arunachalam v. U.S. Dist. Court for the N. Dist. of Cal., 140 S. Ct. 40, 205 L. Ed. 2d 21 (U.S. 2019).

Pincite

140 S. Ct. 40 (Arunachalam v. U.S. Dist. Court for the N. Dist. of Cal.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related