Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice
| 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.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Court won't rule on RU-486 abortions (Lyle Denniston, November 4, 2013)
- New conflict on RU-486 abortions (Lyle Denniston, November 1, 2013)
- Oklahoma anti-abortion law explained (Lyle Denniston, October 29, 2013)
- Cline symposium: Another correction of the abortion distortion coming? (Casey Mattox, October 1, 2013)
- Cline symposium: Oklahoma law could force doctors to provide substandard medical care to women using medications to end a pregnancy (Jennifer Blasdell and Nancy Stanwood, September 20, 2013)
- Cline symposium: Do the right thing (Louise Melling, September 19, 2013)
- Cline symposium: Abortion, states' medical authority, and the "undue burden" test (Helen Alvaré, September 18, 2013)
- Cline symposium: What justifies bad medicine? (Priscilla Smith, September 17, 2013)
- Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice: Once more unto the breach (O. Carter Snead, September 16, 2013)
- Symposium announcement: Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice (Kali Borkoski, September 13, 2013)
- New test on abortion rights (Lyle Denniston, June 27, 2013)
- Petition of the day (Mary Pat Dwyer, June 15, 2013)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| 03/04/2013 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 8, 2013) |
| 03/26/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner. |
| 04/01/2013 | Waiver of right of respondents Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, et al. to respond filed. |
| 04/05/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Women and Families Hurt by RU-486 filed. |
| 04/08/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Family Research Council, and Alliance Defending Freedom filed. |
| 04/08/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc. filed. |
| 04/08/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Dr. John Thorp, M.D., et al. filed. |
| 04/08/2013 | Brief amici curiae of 79 Oklahoma Legislators filed. |
| 04/16/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 9, 2013. |
| 04/22/2013 | Response Requested . (Due May 22, 2013) |
| 05/16/2013 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 28, 2013. |
| 05/28/2013 | Brief of respondents Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, et al. in opposition filed. |
| 06/03/2013 | Reply of petitioners Terry Cline, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| 06/04/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013. |
| 06/25/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2013. |
| 06/27/2013 | 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. |
| 10/29/2013 | Answer to certified questions filed. |
| 11/04/2013 | Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted. |
| 12/06/2013 | MANDATE ISSUED. |
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.