Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Supreme Court Calendar: April Oral Arguments Schedule

By Robyn Hagan Cain on February 06, 2012 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

The final cases on the October 2011 Term Supreme Court calendar have been announced. On Friday, the Court released the April oral arguments schedule.

While we'll have to wait and see if April showers bring May flowers, we can be certain that April oral arguments will yield a flood of opinions in cases dealing with the government's relationship with Native Americans.

The following cases are on the April oral argument Supreme Court calendar:

  • Christopher v. SmithKlineBeecham Corp. Examining whether deference is owed to the Labor Secretary's interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act's outside sales exemption and related regulations; and whether the FLSA's outside sales exemption applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.
  • RadLAX Gateway Hotel v. Amalgamated Bank. Considering whether a debtor may pursue a Chapter 11 plan that proposes to sell assets free of liens without allowing the secured creditor to credit bid, but instead providing it with the indubitable equivalent of its claim under the Bankruptcy Code.
  • Dorsey v. United States and Hill v. United States (consolidated). Addressing whether the Fair Sentencing Act applies to all defendants sentenced after its enactment, or if the Act does not apply when the predicate offense occurred before the Act was adopted.
  • Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band v. Patchak and Salazar v. Patchak (consolidated). Examining whether prudential standing can be based on the plaintiff's ability to police an agency's compliance with the Indian Reorganization Act, and if the waiver of sovereign immunity under the Administrative Procedure Act applies in a suit against the government over Indian trust land.
  • Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter. Reviewing whether the government is required to pay all of the contract support costs incurred by a tribal contractor under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act if Congress has imposed an express statutory cap on the appropriations available to pay such costs, and the Secretary cannot pay without exceeding the statutory cap.
  • Arizona v. U.S. Determining whether federal immigration laws preclude Arizona's efforts at cooperative law enforcement and impliedly preempt four provisions of S.B. 1070.

Of the eight cases on the Supreme Court calendar for April, Arizona v. U.S. will likely garner the most attention since Arizona is not the only state to enact a highly-controversial immigration policy. Most notably, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals enjoined parts of Alabama's recently-adopted immigration law, widely considered the strictest law of its kind.

Related Resources:

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard