PROFILPELAJAR.COM

Banister v. Davis
Banister v. Davis
	Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 1, 2020
Full case name	Banister v. Davis
Docket no.	18-6943
Citations	590 U.S. ___ (more)
Holding
	A Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion to alter or amend a habeas court’s judgment is not a second or successive habeas petition under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.
Court membership
	Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito; Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan; Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Case opinions
Majority	Kagan, joined by Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
Dissent	Alito, joined by Thomas
Laws applied
	Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act

Banister v. Davis, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion to alter or amend a habeas court’s judgment is not a second or successive habeas petition under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.^[1]^[2]

References

Text of Banister v. Davis, No. 18-6943, 590 U.S. ___ (2020) is available from: Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain. "[T]he Court is unanimously of opinion that no reporter has or can have any copyright in the written opinions delivered by this Court." Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591, 668 (1834)