Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc.

Editor's Note :

Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc.

Opinion analysis: Court gives broad meaning to “confidential” in FOIA exemption for commercial and financial information – Mark Fenster

Opinion analysis: Punitive damages not available under general maritime law in personal-injury unseaworthiness action – Joel Goldstein

Opinion analysis: Long-time prohibition on registration of scandalous and immoral trademarks is struck down – Megan Carpenter

SCOTUSblog Coverage

SCOTUSblog Coverage

June 2019

Featured Posts

Sponsored by Casetext

SCOTUStalk see all

Email Digest Sign-Up

Merits Case Pages and Archives

Major Cases

Recent Decisions

Current Relists

Recent Special Features

Live Blog Archives

Merits Docket OT18 (June 24, 2019)

Merits Cases by Sitting

Majority Opinions by Author

Voting Breakdown Argued Cases

Majority Lineup 5-4 Decisions

June 2019

Download our App in the Apple Store

Videos see all

Peabody Award

Sigma Delta Chi

National Press Club Award

Silver Gavel Award

American Gavel Award

Webby Award

Conference of June 20, 2019

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
18-483	7th Cir.	Not Argued	May 28, 2019	n/a	Per Curiam	OT 2018

Holding: Indiana’s law relating to the disposition of fetal remains by abortion providers passes rational basis review; certiorari is denied on the question whether the state may bar the knowing provision of sex-, race- or disability-selective abortions by abortion providers, as only the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit has addressed this kind of law.

Judgment: Reversed in a per curiam opinion on May 28, 2019. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justice Sotomayor would deny the petition for a writ of certiorari.

A "view" from the courtroom: Running hot and cold (Mark Walsh)
Justices reverse in part on Indiana abortion law (Amy Howe)
OT2018 #16: "From Scratch" (First Mondays)
Petitions of the week (Aurora Barnes)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Sep 14 2018	Application (18A284) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 23, 2018 to October 22, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Sep 19 2018	Application (18A284) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until October 22, 2018.
Oct 12 2018	Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 15, 2018)
Oct 23 2018	Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 15, 2018 to December 5, 2018, submitted to The Clerk. filed.
Oct 25 2018	Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 5, 2018.
Nov 14 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of Alliance Defending Freedom and the Radiance Foundation filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of American Center for Law & Justice, et al. filed. (11/20/208)
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of Americans United for Life, et al. filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of Fondation Jerome Lejeune, Saving Down Syndrome, and Down Pride filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Educational and Legal Defense Fund, Inc. filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of The Restoration Project, et al. filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Susan B. Anthony List filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of Pro-Life Legal Defense Fund, et al. filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Beverly McMillan, M.D. filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of State of Wisconsin, et al. filed.
Nov 15 2018	Brief amicus curiae of CatholicVote.org Education Fund filed.
Nov 15 2018	Amicus brief of Prolife Center at the University of St. Thomas not accepted for filing. (November 20, 2018)(Corrected version submitted)
Nov 15 2018	Brief amici curiae of Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, et al. filed.
Nov 19 2018	Amicus brief of American Center for Law & Justice and Parents of Disabled Children not accepted for filing. (November 20, 2018)(Corrected version submitted)
Nov 19 2018	Brief amicus curiae of Prolife Center at the University of St. Thomas filed.
Dec 04 2018	Brief of respondents Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.
Dec 18 2018	Reply of petitioners Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health, et al. filed.
Dec 19 2018	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
Jan 07 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.
Jan 14 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/18/2019.
Feb 04 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
Feb 19 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.
Feb 25 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
Mar 11 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
Mar 18 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2019.
Mar 25 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/29/2019.
Mar 28 2019	Letter of March 15, 2019 from counsel for amicus curiae Wisconsin received. (Distributed)
Mar 28 2019	Letter of March 27, 2019 from counsel for amicus curiae West Virginia received. (Distributed)
Apr 08 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
Apr 15 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/18/2019.
Apr 22 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.
May 06 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
May 13 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2019.
May 20 2019	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
May 28 2019	Petition GRANTED and Judgment REVERSED as to Question 1 presented by the petition. Petition DENIED as to Question 2 presented by the petition. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion). Justice Sotomayor would deny the petition for a writ of certiorari as to both questions presented. Justice Thomas, concurring. (Detached Opinion). Justice Ginsburg, concurring in part and dissenting in part. (Detached Opinion).

Featured Posts

Opinion analysis: Court gives broad meaning to “confidential” in FOIA exemption for commercial and financial information – Mark Fenster

Opinion analysis: Punitive damages not available under general maritime law in personal-injury unseaworthiness action – Joel Goldstein

Opinion analysis: Long-time prohibition on registration of scandalous and immoral trademarks is struck down – Megan Carpenter
Sponsored by Casetext
SCOTUStalk see all
Email Digest Sign-Up
Receive a daily email digest from Feedburner by entering your email.
Merits Case Pages and Archives

Archives

or

This Week at the Court
On Monday, the Supreme Court released orders from the June 20 conference; the justices granted eight new cases, for a total of five hours of oral argument next term: Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, Ovalles v. Barr, Dex Media Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, Maine Community Health Options v. United States, Moda Health Plan Inc. v. United States, Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Co. v. United States, Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org Inc. and Banister v. Davis.
Also on Monday, the justices released their opinions in four argued cases: United States v. Davis, Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, Iancu v. Brunetti and The Dutra Group v. Batterton.
The Supreme Court will release opinions in one or more argued cases on Wednesday at 10 a.m.
Major Cases
- Department of Commerce v. New York
  (1) Whether the district court erred in enjoining the secretary of the Department of Commerce from reinstating a question about citizenship to the 2020 decennial census on the ground that the secretary’s decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq; (2) whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the APA, a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker -- including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking executive branch officials -- without a strong showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis; and (3) whether the secretary’s decision to add a citizenship question to the decennial census violated the enumeration clause of the U.S. Constitution.
- Lamone v. Benisek
  In case in which the plaintiffs allege that a Maryland congressional district was gerrymandered to retaliate against them for their political views: (1) whether the various legal claims articulated by the three-judge district court are unmanageable; (2) whether the three-judge district court erred when, in granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, it resolved disputes of material fact as to multiple elements of plaintiffs’ claims, failed to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and treated as “undisputed” evidence that is the subject of still-unresolved hearsay and other evidentiary objections; and (3) whether the three-judge district court abused its discretion in entering an injunction despite the plaintiffs’ years-long delay in seeking injunctive relief, rendering the remedy applicable to at most one election before the next decennial census necessitates another redistricting.
- Kisor v. Wilkie
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Auer v. Robbins and Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., which direct courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation.
- Rucho v. Common Cause
  (1) Whether plaintiffs have standing to press their partisan gerrymandering claims; (2) whether plaintiffs’ partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable; and (3) whether North Carolina’s 2016 congressional map is, in fact, an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.
- The American Legion v. American Humanist Association
- Gamble v. United States
see all this term’s cases »
Recent Decisions
- Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media Where commercial or financial information is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner and provided to the government under an assurance of privacy, the information is “confidential” within the meaning of 5 U. S. C. §552(b)(4), the Freedom of Information Act’s Exemption 4.
- Iancu v. Brunetti The Lanham Act prohibition on the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks infringes the First Amendment.
- The Dutra Group v. Batterton A plaintiff may not recover punitive damages on a maritime claim of unseaworthiness.
- United States v. Davis Title 18 U. S. C. §924(c)(3)(B), which provides enhanced penalties for using a firearm during a “crime of violence,” is unconstitutionally vague.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. Bennett Regulator Guards Inc. (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred in concluding that it had jurisdiction to review the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to institute inter partes review of respondent’s patent over respondent’s objection that it was time-barred; and (2) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred when it rejected the longstanding principle that a dismissal without prejudice leaves the parties as if a suit had never been brought, splitting the circuits.
- Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
- Kelly v. United States Whether a public official “defraud[s]” the government of its property by advancing a “public policy reason” for an official decision that is not her subjective “real reason” for making the decision.
More Petitions »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 69

Cases decided 61

Summary reversals 5

Merits cases granted to date 74

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Merits Docket OT18 (June 24, 2019)
Merits Cases by Sitting
Majority Opinions by Author
Voting Breakdown Argued Cases
Majority Lineup 5-4 Decisions

Full Calendar Submit Event

Orders/Opinions
Arguments
Conferences

Events
Holidays
Multiple

Download our App in the Apple Store
Videos see all

Justice Thomas at the Supreme Court Historical Society

On June 3, Justice Clarence Thomas spoke with David Rubenstein for the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual lecture at the Supreme Court.

Peabody Award
Awarded the Peabody Award for excellence in electronic media.
Sigma Delta Chi
Awarded the Sigma Delta Chi deadline reporting award for online coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
National Press Club Award
Awarded the National Press Club's Breaking News Award for coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
Silver Gavel Award
Awarded the Silver Gavel Award by the American Bar Association for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system.
American Gavel Award
Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Webby Award
Awarded the Webby Award for excellence on the internet.

Cases argued	69
Cases decided	61
Summary reversals	5
Merits cases granted to date	74

3
Orders
Opinions

6
Conference

10
Orders
Opinions

13
Conference

17
Orders
Opinions

20
Conference
Opinions

24
Orders
Opinions