Missouri v. California
Motion for leave to file the bill of complaint denied on January 7, 2019.
Docket No.22o148
Issue
(1) Whether the Egg Products Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. § 1031 et seq., pre-empts the California regulations that require eggs shipped to California to comport with different standards of quality, condition, weight, quantity, or grade which are in addition to and different from the EPIA; and (2) whether the California regulations constitute a protectionist measure in violation of the Commerce Clause. CVSG: 11/29/2018.
Dec 4, 2017Motion for leave to file a bill of complaint filed.Jan 10, 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 2, 2018 to March 5, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
Jan 12, 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 5, 2018
Feb 2, 2018Brief amicus curiae of Center for Consumer Freedom filed.Feb 2, 2018Brief amicus curiae of Landmark Legal Foundation filed.Feb 2, 2018Brief amici curiae of Association des Éleveurs de Canards et d’Oies du Québec, HVFG LLC, and Hot’s Restaurant Group, Inc. filed.Mar 5, 2018Brief of defendant State of California in opposition filed.Mar 5, 2018Brief amicus curiae of Association of California Egg Farmers filed.Mar 20, 2018Reply of plaintiffs State of Missouri, et al. filed. (Distributed)Mar 21, 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.
Apr 16, 2018The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
Nov 29, 2018Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.Dec 17, 2018Supplemental brief of plaintiffs State of Missouri, et al. filed.Dec 19, 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
Jan 7, 2019Motion for leave to file a bill of complaint DENIED. Justice Thomas would grant the motion.
Recommended Citation: Missouri v. California, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/missouri-v-california-2/