Kahn v. United States
Consolidated with:
Linked with:
Issues: (1) Whether, when the government prosecutes a medical practitioner under the Controlled Substances Act for issuing a prescription outside “the usual course of professional practice,” the government is required to prove that the doctor knew or intended that the prescription be outside the scope of professional practice; (2) whether a “good faith” defense in the context of a licensed medical practitioner prosecuted under the Controlled Substances Act protects doctors who have an honest but mistaken belief that they have issued the charged prescription in “the usual course of professional practice,” and, if so, whether that belief must be objectively reasonable; and (3) whether the “usual course of professional practice” and “legitimate medical purposes” prongs of 21 C.F.R § 1306.04(a) must be read in the conjunctive or the disjunctive.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Amid overdose crisis, court will weigh physician intent in “pill mill” prosecutions and more under the Controlled Substances Act (Abbe R. Gluck, February 28, 2022)
- One new relist on arbitration clauses (John Elwood, November 10, 2021)
- Justices add four new cases to their docket, including Bivens case, but won’t reconsider Bivens itself (Amy Howe, November 5, 2021)
- Preemption, Bivens, conflicts of interest, and free exercise (John Elwood, November 3, 2021)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) |
|---|
| Jul 26 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 30, 2021) |
| Aug 24 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 30, 2021 to September 29, 2021, submitted to The Clerk. |
| Aug 25 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 29, 2021. |
| Sep 29 2021 | Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed. |
| Oct 12 2021 | Reply of petitioner Shakeel Kahn filed. (Distributed) |
| Oct 14 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/29/2021. |
| Nov 01 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/5/2021. |
| Nov 05 2021 | Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 20-1410 is granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. |
| Nov 05 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. 20-1410. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 20-1410. 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.” |
| Dec 17 2021 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, March 1, 2022. VIDED. |
| Dec 21 2021 | Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit. |
| Dec 21 2021 | The record from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer. |
| Jan 18 2022 | CIRCULATED |
| Feb 16 2022 | The record from the U.S.D.C. District of Wyoming is electronic and located on Pacer. The restricted record containing Sealed, Non-Public, and Ex-Parte pleadings has been electronically filed. |
| Mar 01 2022 | Argued. For petitioner in 20-1410: Lawrence S. Robbins, Washington, D. C. For petitioner in 21-5261: Beau B. Brindley, Chicago, Ill. For respondent: Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED. |
