Enbridge Energy v. Nessel [Oral Argument Live Thread]
Audio Stream [10AM Eastern]
Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel
Question presented to the Court:
Whether district courts have the authority to excuse the 30-day procedural time limit for removal in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1).
Opinion Below: 6th Cir.
Orders and Proceedings:
Brief of petitioners Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, et al.
Joint appendix
Brief of respondent Dana Nessel, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, on behalf of the People of the State of Michigan
Reply of petitioners Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, et al.
Our quality standards are relaxed for this post, given its nature as a "reaction thread". All other rules apply as normal.
Live commentary threads will be available for each oral argument day. See the SCOTUSblog case calendar for upcoming oral arguments.
Audio Stream [10AM Eastern]
Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel
Question presented to the Court:
Whether district courts have the authority to excuse the 30-day procedural time limit for removal in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1).
Opinion Below: 6th Cir.
Orders and Proceedings:
Brief of petitioners Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, et al.
Joint appendix
Brief of respondent Dana Nessel, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, on behalf of the People of the State of Michigan
Reply of petitioners Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, et al.
Our quality standards are relaxed for this post, given its nature as a "reaction thread". All other rules apply as normal.
Live commentary threads will be available for each oral argument day. See the SCOTUSblog case calendar for upcoming oral arguments.
Enbridge Energy v. Nessel [Oral Argument Live Thread]
Audio Stream [10AM Eastern]
Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel
Question presented to the Court:
Whether district courts have the authority to excuse the 30-day procedural time limit for removal in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1).
Opinion Below: 6th Cir.
Orders and Proceedings:
Brief of petitioners Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, et al.
Joint appendix
Brief of respondent Dana Nessel, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, on behalf of the People of the State of Michigan
Reply of petitioners Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, et al.
Our quality standards are relaxed for this post, given its nature as a "reaction thread". All other rules apply as normal.
Live commentary threads will be available for each oral argument day. See the SCOTUSblog case calendar for upcoming oral arguments.
0 Comments
0 Shares
28 Views
0 Reviews
