Graham v. Fulton County Special Purpose Grand Jury

Emergency application for stay and injunction pending appeal denied on November 1, 2022.

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
22a337	N.D. Ga.	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	OT 2022

Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should block a district court"s ruling that ordered Sen. Lindsey Graham to testify before a Georgia grand jury investigating possible election interference.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Justices reject Grahams bid to avoid testifying in grand-jury inquiry on election interference (Amy Howe, November 1, 2022)
Graham asks justices to block subpoena in election-interference probe (Amy Howe, October 21, 2022)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
10/21/2022	Application (22A337) for stay and writ of injunction pending appeal, submitted to Justice Thomas.
10/22/2022	Response to application (22A337) requested by Justice Thomas, due by 5 p.m. (EDT), Thursday, October 27, 2022.
10/24/2022	Upon consideration of the application of counsel for the applicant, it is ordered that the August 15, 2022 order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, case No. 1:22-CV-03027, as modified by the district court’s September 1, 2022 order, is hereby stayed pending further order of Justice Thomas or of the Court.
10/25/2022	Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Texas, Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Utah.
10/27/2022	Response to application from respondent Fulton County Special Purpose Grand Jury filed.
10/27/2022	Motion for leave to file brief of amicus curiae filed by Derek T. Muller.
10/27/2022	Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Separation of Powers Clinic at Antonin Scalia Law School.
10/27/2022	Motion for leave to file brief for amici curiae filed by Former Federal Prosecutors.
10/28/2022	Reply of applicant Lindsey Graham, United States Senator filed.
11/01/2022	Application (22A337) referred to the Court.
11/01/2022	Application (22A337) for stay and an injunction pending appeal presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied. The order heretofore entered by Justice Thomas is vacated. The lower courts assumed that the informal investigative fact-finding that Senator Graham assertedly engaged in constitutes legislative activity protected by the Speech or Debate Clause, U. S. Const. Art. I, §6, cl. 1, and they held that Senator Graham may not be questioned about such activities. The lower courts also made clear that Senator Graham may return to the District Court should disputes arise regarding the application of the Speech or Debate Clause immunity to specific questions. Accordingly, a stay or injunction is not necessary to safeguard the Senator’s Speech or Debate Clause immunity.