Colorado Dept. of State v. Baca, 19-518 (2020)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Number: 19-518
Visitors: 10
Judges: Per Curiam
Filed: Jul. 06, 2020
Latest Update: Jul. 06, 2020
Summary: (Slip Opinion) Cite as: 591 U. S. _ (2020) 1 Per Curiam NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash- ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _ No. 19–518 _ COLORADO DEPARTMENT
Summary: (Slip Opinion) Cite as: 591 U. S. _ (2020) 1 Per Curiam NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash- ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _ No. 19–518 _ COLORADO DEPARTMENT O..
More
(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 591 U. S. ____ (2020) 1
Per Curiam
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
_________________
No. 19–518
_________________
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF STATE, PETITIONER
v. MICHEAL BACA, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
[July 6, 2020]
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Tenth Circuit is reversed for the reasons stated in
Chiafalo v. Washington, ante, p. ___.
It is so ordered.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR took no part in the decision of this
case.
JUSTICE THOMAS concurs in the judgment for the reasons
stated in his separate opinion in Chiafalo v. Washington,
ante, p. ___.
Source: CourtListener
