|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|20-454||4th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2021|
Issues: (1) Whether the Department of Health and Human Services' rule, which prohibits Title X projects from providing referrals for abortion as a method of family planning, falls within the agency’s statutory authority; and (2) whether the rule is the product of reasoned decisionmaking.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 07 2020||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 9, 2020)|
|Oct 30 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 9, 2020 to December 9, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Nov 02 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 9, 2020.|
|Nov 03 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Alex M. Azar, et al.|
|Nov 03 2020||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Mayor and City Council of Baltimore|
|Nov 09 2020||Brief amici curiae of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, et al. filed.|
|Dec 05 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 9, 2020 to February 5, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Dec 07 2020||Petitioners response to motion for further extension of time to file a response filed.|
|Dec 08 2020||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part; the time is further extended to and including December 14, 2020.|
|Dec 08 2020||Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 15.5. filed.|
|Dec 14 2020||Brief of respondent Mayor and City Council of Baltimore in opposition filed.|
|Dec 23 2020||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.|
|Dec 23 2020||Reply of petitioners Alex M. Azar, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 19 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.|
|Feb 12 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.|
|Feb 22 2021||Petition GRANTED. The petitions for writs of certiorari in Nos. 20-429 and 20-539 are granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.|
|Feb 22 2021||Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 20-429. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 20-429. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”|
|Mar 12 2021||Joint stipulation to dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 46.1 filed.|
|May 17 2021||The Government has filed a letter brief representing that it will continue enforcing the challenged rule and regulations outside the State of Maryland for as long as they remain operative. If further litigation is brought against the challenged rule and regulations outside of Maryland, the Government represents that it will either oppose that litigation on threshold grounds or seek to hold the litigation in abeyance pending the completion of notice and comment. In light of the Government’s representations, the motions for leave to intervene are denied, and the petitions in Nos. 20-429, 20-454, and 20-539 are dismissed pursuant to Rule 46.1. If the Government fails to enforce the challenged rule and regulations outside of Maryland prior to the completion of notice and comment, or if litigation is brought against the challenged rule and regulations outside of Maryland, any aggrieved party may file an application in this Court after seeking relief in the appropriate District Court and Court of Appeals. Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, and Justice Gorsuch would grant the motions for leave to intervene and deny the stipulations to dismiss the petitions.|
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...
I really enjoyed getting to chat with the incomparable @AHoweBlogger about (1) why #SCOTUS's "shadow docket" *is* a big deal; (2) why it's so hard to figure out how to include it in broader assessments of the Justices' work; and (3) some possible ways to include it going forward. https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1417545384314949635
How do you solve a problem like the shadow docket? @steve_vladeck has some thoughts and shared them with @AHoweBlogger in the latest SCOTUStalk.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.