|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-402||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2013|
Issue: (1) Whether the Ninth Circuit correctly held that the “viability” line from Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey remains the only critical factor in determining constitutionality, to the exclusion of other significant governmental interests, or whether Arizona’s post-twenty-week limitation is facially valid because it does not pose a substantial obstacle to a safe abortion; (2) whether the Ninth Circuit erred in declining to recognize that the State’s interests in preventing documented fetal pain, protecting against a significantly increased health risk to the mother, and upholding the integrity of the medical profession are sufficient to support limitations on abortion after twenty weeks gestational age when terminating the pregnancy is not necessary to avert death or serious health risk to the mother; and (3) whether, if the Ninth Circuit correctly held that its decision is compelled by this Court’s precedent in Roe v. Wade and its progeny, those precedents should be revisited in light of the recent, compelling evidence of fetal pain and significantly increased health risk to the mother for abortions performed after twenty weeks gestational age.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 7 2013||Application (13A177) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 19, 2013 to September 28, 2013, submitted to Justice Kennedy.|
|Aug 14 2013||Application (13A177) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until September 28, 2013.|
|Sep 27 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 30, 2013)|
|Oct 10 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 29, 2013, for all respondents.|
|Oct 11 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petiioners and counsel for the respondents.|
|Oct 29 2013||Brief amicus curiae of American Center for Law & Justice filed.|
|Oct 29 2013||Brief amici curiae of States of Ohio and Montana and 14 other States filed.|
|Oct 29 2013||Brief amici curiae of Honorable Mary Fallin, et al. filed.|
|Oct 30 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Arizona Policy filed.|
|Oct 30 2013||Brief amici curiae of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, et al. filed.|
|Oct 30 2013||Brief amici curiae of Heartbeat International, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Oct 30 2013||Brief amici curiae of National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, et al. filed.|
|Oct 30 2013||Brief amici curiae of Jerome LeJeune Foundation USA, et al. filed.|
|Nov 8 2013||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including December 9, 2013, for all respondents.|
|Dec 9 2013||Brief of respondent Barbara La Walt, Pima County Attorney in opposition filed.|
|Dec 9 2013||Brief of respondents Paul A. Isaacson, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 23 2013||Reply of petitioners Tom Horne, Attorney General of Arizona, et al. filed.|
|Dec 24 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 10, 2014.|
|Jan 13 2014||Petition DENIED.|
FWOTSC. You figure that one out.*
h/t to @marinklevy for the story and the always-entertaining threads.
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).