Public policy made simple. Dive into our information hub today!

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION v. ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY ASSOCIATION (2016)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION v. ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY ASSOCIATION
Term: 2015
Important Dates
Argued: October 14, 2015
Decided: January 25, 2016
Outcome
Reversed and remanded
Vote
6-2
Majority
Stephen BreyerRuth Bader GinsburgElena KaganAnthony KennedyJohn RobertsSonia Sotomayor
Dissenting
Antonin ScaliaClarence Thomas

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION v. ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY ASSOCIATION is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on January 25, 2016. The case was argued before the court on October 14, 2015.

In a 6-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit (includes the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia but not the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which has local jurisdiction).

For a full list of cases decided in the 2010s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Roberts Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Economic Activity - Federal and some few state regulation of public utilities regulation: electric power
  • Petitioner: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: Electric or hydroelectric power utility, power cooperative, or gas and electric company
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 577 U.S. 260
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: John Roberts
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Elena Kagan

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes