|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-1094||Ok.||Not Argued||Nov 4, 2013||TBD||Per Curiam||OT 2013|
Issue: Whether the Oklahoma Supreme Court erred in holding – without analysis or discussion – that the Oklahoma law requiring that abortion-inducing drugs be administered according to the protocol described on the drugs’ FDA-approved labels is facially unconstitutional under Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Pursuant to the Revised Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, Okla. Stat., Tit. 20, §1601 et seq. (West 2002), respectfully certifies to the Supreme Court of Oklahoma the following question: Whether H.B. No. 1970, Section 1, Chapter 216, O.S.L. 2011 prohibits: (1) the use of misoprostol to induce abortions, including the use of misoprostol in conjunction with mifepristone according to a protocol approved by the Food and Drug Administration; and (2) the use of methotrexate to treat ectopic pregnancies. Further proceedings in this case are reserved pending receipt of a response from the Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
Judgment: Dismissed as improvidently granted. in a per curiam opinion on November 4, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 4 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 8, 2013)|
|Mar 26 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Apr 1 2013||Waiver of right of respondents Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, et al. to respond filed.|
|Apr 5 2013||Brief amici curiae of Women and Families Hurt by RU-486 filed.|
|Apr 8 2013||Brief amici curiae of Family Research Council, and Alliance Defending Freedom filed.|
|Apr 8 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc. filed.|
|Apr 8 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Dr. John Thorp, M.D., et al. filed.|
|Apr 8 2013||Brief amici curiae of 79 Oklahoma Legislators filed.|
|Apr 16 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 9, 2013.|
|Apr 22 2013||Response Requested . (Due May 22, 2013)|
|May 16 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 28, 2013.|
|May 28 2013||Brief of respondents Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Jun 3 2013||Reply of petitioners Terry Cline, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 4 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013.|
|Jun 25 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2013.|
|Jun 27 2013||Petition GRANTED. This Court, pursuant to the Revised Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, Okla. Stat., Tit. 20 Sec. 1601 et seq. (West 2002) respectfully certifies to the Supreme Court of Oklahoma the following question: Whether H. B. No. 1970, Section 1, Chapter 216, O.S.L. 2011 prohibits: (1) the use of misoprostol to induce abortions, including the use of misoprostol in conjunction with mifepristone according to a protocol approved by the Food and Drug Administration; and (2) the use of methotrexate to treat eptopic pregnancies. Further proceedings in this case are reserved pending receipt of a response from the Supreme Court of Oklahoma.|
|Oct 29 2013||Answer to certified questions filed.|
|Nov 4 2013||Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted.|
|Dec 6 2013||MANDATE ISSUED.|
Bill Cosby’s prosecutors asked the Supreme Court to reinstate his conviction today. Quick explainer.
In our latest episode of SCOTUStalk, @shefalil of @19thnews joined us to preview Wednesday's argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. Shefali explains the current state of abortion access and the case's implications in Mississippi and across America.
Roe, Dobbs, and the current state of abortion access - SCOTUSblog
In advance of Wednesday's oral argument in the momentous abortion case, Shefali Luthra, a gender and health care r...
Update: Without calling for a response or referring the case to the full court, Justice Breyer just rejected last week's challenge from Massachusetts hospital workers who object to the hospital's COVID vaccine mandate.
(Breyer handles emergency requests from Massachusetts.)
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket challenge to a COVID vaccine mandate. This one is from employees at Mass General Brigham who say the Boston-based hospital violated federal law by not granting them exemptions from the hospital's vaccine policy. Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/21A175.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral argument in a case about Medicare payments to hospitals that serve low-income patients. Lots of money at stake, plus potential implications for the Chevron doctrine. @JACoganJr explains the case:
Money for safety-net hospitals at stake in dispute over Medicare payment formula - SCOTUSblog
When it comes to highlighting the complexity of the Medicare Act and its hospital payment rules, Becerra v. Empire...
Two days from now, SCOTUS will hear the biggest abortion case in a generation. In a battle over a Mississippi law, abortion opponents are asking the court to end the constitutional right to abortion. Here's our preview of the case, via @AHoweBlogger.
Roe v. Wade hangs in balance as reshaped court prepares to hear biggest abortion case in decades - SCOTUSblog
When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would...
JUST IN: One new cert grant this morning: Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP. More on the case here: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/berger-v-north-carolina-state-conference-of-the-naacp/
#SCOTUS adds one new case to its merits docket this morning: Berger v. NC Conference of NAACP, in which the justices will weigh in on an effort by Republican legislators in the state to intervene to defend the state’s voter-ID law. Here's the order: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/112421zr_7li8.pdf