Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Robert M. Wilkinson, Acting Attorney General, et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, California, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 18-17308, 18-17311 · judgment July 13, 2020
Before the decision, about 6.1× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a federal-government petitioner, counsel who has won certiorari before, and a Ninth Circuit decision below.
Questions presented
The Department of Justice administers the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne JAG) program, which provides millions of dollars in financial assistance to law enforcement in the form of grant awards to States and local governments nationwide. For Fiscal Year 2017, the Department announced two new special conditions designed to ensure that, in their programs receiving such federal assistance, grantees provide a basic level of cooperation with federal authorities with respect to aliens held in state or local criminal custody. The “notice condition” requires grantees to have a policy designed to ensure that facilities provide, upon a request by the Department of Homeland Security, advance notice of the scheduled release date and time for a particular alien. The “access condition” requires grantees to have a policy to afford federal authorities access to the grantee’s facilities to meet with an alien. In addition, the Department of Justice imposed the “certification condition,” requiring grantees to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373—which generally bars state and local governments from restricting the sharing of “information regarding the citizenship or immigration status * * * of any individual” with federal immigration authorities, ibid.—and to certify such compliance. The questions presented are as follows:
-
Whether the Department has statutory authority to impose the notice and access conditions on grantees that accept Byrne JAG awards.
-
Whether the Department may withhold Byrne JAG funds from respondents for noncompliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373. (I)
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Brian H. Fletcher
Acting Solicitor General
For respondent
Sara Jennifer Eisenberg
San Francisco City Attorney's Office
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Proceedings
- Mar 04 2021Joint stipulation to dismiss the case pursuant Rule 46.1 filed.
- Mar 04 2021Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
- Mar 01 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/5/2021.
- Feb 22 2021Rescheduled.
- Feb 10 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/26/2021.
- Feb 03 2021Rescheduled.
- Jan 27 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
- Jan 27 2021Letter from Robert M. Wilkinson, Acting Attorney General, et al., received.
- Jan 13 2021Brief of respondents State of California ex rel. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General in opposition filed.
- Jan 13 2021Brief of respondents City and County of San Francisco, California, et al. in opposition filed.
- Nov 20 2020The motions to extend the time to file responses to the peition for a writ of certiorari are granted and the time is extended to and including January 13, 2021, for all respondents.
- Nov 19 2020Motion of City and County of San Francisco to extend the time to file a response from December 14, 2020 to January 13, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Nov 19 2020Motion of State of California to extend the time to file a response from December 14, 2020 to January 13, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Nov 13 2020Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 14, 2020)