Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Lawyers United Inc., et al. v. United States, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 20-5269 · judgment March 15, 2021
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
If all men and women are created equal, all lawyers are created equal. This 21st Century case implicates this Supreme Court’s supervisory responsibility over the balkanized and disparate attorney licensing Local Rules in the ninety-four United States District Courts that some commentators have concluded are without rhyme or reason. Congress concluded that there is no meaningful opportunity to challenge United States District Court Local Rules because the judges who make the rules decide whether they are lawful. It thus enacted 28 U.S.C. § 332(d)(4) and placed on each United States Circuit Judicial Council a statutory duty to periodically review District Court Local Rules for consistency with 28 U.S.C. §§ 2071-72. (App. 141-143) Congress declared 28 U.S.C. § 2071(a) incorporates the standard of review set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b), which provides: “Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge, of modify any substantive rights.”
-
The first question presented is whether Local Rules that on their face create classes of citizens and lawyers exceed the rule-making authority of the United States District Courts?
-
The second question presented is whether Local Rules that on their face create classes of citizens and lawyers and compel the petitioners, and all similarly situated licensed attorneys, to subsidize, join and associate with a second, third, and fourth mandatory state bar association as a condition precedent to obtain general admission licensing privileges in the United States District Courthouse are constitutional?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Joseph Robert Giannini
For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Amicus briefs
2 cert-stage
Proceedings
- Feb 22 2022Rehearing DENIED.
- Feb 14 2022Petitioners Respectfully Requests the Court to Notice of Recent Developments That Call Into Question this Court Supervisory Review Over the Lower Courts and Militate in Favor of Review Being Granted of Lawyers United Inc., et al. not accepted for filing. (March 29, 2022)
- Feb 04 2022Notice the Court Granted Certiorari in Equal Protection College Admissions Case 20-1199 and for Equal Reasons in this Attorney Case in the United States District Courthouse of Lawyers United Inc., et al. not accepted for filing. (February 23, 2022)
- Jan 25 2022Notice of Related Cases Presenting the Same Question Presented and Request for Conferencing Them At the Same Time of Lawyers United Inc., et al. submitted.
- Jan 12 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022.
- Jan 03 2022Petition for Rehearing filed.
- Dec 06 2021Petition DENIED.
- Nov 12 2021Second supplemental brief of petitioners Lawyers United Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Nov 09 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/3/2021.
- Nov 05 2021Brief amicus curiae of SarkarLaw filed. (Distributed)
- Nov 05 2021Brief amicus curiae of Herbert Detrick filed. (Distributed)
- Nov 04 2021Waiver of right of respondent United States, et al. to respond filed.
- Oct 25 2021Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, United States, et al.
- Oct 20 2021Supplemental brief of petitioners Lawyers United Inc., et al. filed.
- Oct 07 2021Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Lawyers United Inc., et al.
- Oct 01 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 5, 2021)