County of San Diego, California v. Mann

Pending petition
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
18-1465 9th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Issues: (1) Whether a parent claiming substantive due process violations needs to demonstrate that the county’s conduct “shocks the conscience,” as five circuits have held, or whether omissions by the county—i.e., the lack of obtaining parental notice and consent—alone result in municipal liability, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held below; (2) whether parental notice and consent (or a court order) are prerequisites to a child’s medical examination, even if (i) the exams are diagnostic and do not involve treatment decisions; and (ii) any investigatory purpose of the examinations is incidental to the primary purposes of protecting the child’s health and preventing the spread of contagious disease; and (3) whether, in conducting its “special needs” balancing test under the Fourth Amendment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit erred by disregarding the government’s interest in protecting the health of other children and center staff.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
May 22 2019Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 24, 2019)
Jun 24 2019Brief of respondents Mark Mann, et al. in opposition filed.
Jul 08 2019Reply of petitioner County of San Diego filed.
Jul 10 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
 
Share:
Term Snapshot
At a Glance
Awards