|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.|
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
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.