Five certiorari grants from the Long Conference, consolidated to three arguments (10/4/19)

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/100419zr_onkq.pdf (Today’s order list, which contains the certiorari grants and nothing else.) (The remaining order list will be released Monday, October 7 at 9:30 am.)

Issue : Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital conflicts with the Supreme Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt .

Issues : (1) Whether abortion providers can be presumed to have third-party standing to challenge health and safety regulations on behalf of their patients absent a “close” relationship with their patients and a “hindrance” to their patients’ ability to sure on their own behalf; and (2) whether objections to prudential standing are waivable – per the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th and Federal Circuits – or non-waivable per the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C., 2nd, and 6th Circuits.

The two cases above are consolidated for briefing, arguments and decision.

I have not give a lot of consideration to these cases yet and therefore will refrain from commenting on them.

Issue : Whether the United States Forest Service has the authority to grant rights-of-way under the Mineral Leasing Act through lands traversed by the Appalachian Trail within national forests.

Issue : Whether the United States Forest Service has the authority under the Mineral Leasing Act and National Trails System Act to grant rights-of-way through national-forest lands that the Appalachian Trail traverses.

The two cases above are consolidated for briefing, arguments and decision.

As above, I have not give a lot of consideration to these cases yet and therefore will refrain from commenting on them.

Issue : Whether the federal criminal prohibition against encouraging or inducing illegal immigration for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and (B)(i), is facially unconstitutional.

And again, I will refrain from commenting as above.

I will come back to this thread later with comments.