Supreme Court Will Finally Move To Electronic Filing and Public Access

Chief Justice John Roberts announced yesterday in his Year-End Report on the State of the Judiciary (full text) that the U.S. Supreme Court will finally develop its own system for electronic filing and retrieval of documents. He said in part:

The Supreme Court is currently developing its own electronic filing system, which may be operational as soon as 2016. Once the system is implemented, all filings at the Court—petitions and responses to petitions, merits briefs, and all other types of motions and applications—will be available to the legal community and the public without cost on the Court’s website. Initially, the official filing of documents will continue to be on paper for all parties in all cases, with the electronic submission an additional requirement for parties represented by attorneys. Once the system has operated effectively for some time and the Supreme Court Bar has become well acquainted with it, the Court expects that electronic filing will be the official means for all parties represented by counsel, but paper filings will still be required. Parties proceeding pro se will continue to submit documents only on paper, and Court personnel will scan and upload those documents to the system for public access.

Much of his report is an explanation of why the Court has been so slow in adopting this technology.  Legal Times has more on the announcement.

Cert. Petiiton Filed In 6th Circuit ACA Non-Profit Contraceptive Mandate Case

On Dec. 12, a petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Michigan Catholic Conference v. Burwell. (Docket entry). The full text of the petition is available on Westlaw at  2014 WL 7166539. In the case, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied preliminary injunctions to several Catholic non-profit entities that object to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage accommodation. (See prior posting.) BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required] reports on the filing of the petition.

Supreme Court Denies Stay of Florida Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court late yesterday afternoon denied an application for a stay in a Florida same-sex marriage case while the decision is on appeal to the 11th Circuit.  The Supreme Court's order (full text) in Armstrong v. Brenner, (Dec. 19, 2014) results in a district court decision handed down in August taking effect on January 5. (See prior related posting.)  Justices Scalia and Thomas dissented from the Court's action.  SCOTUSblog reports on the Court's action.

Supreme Court Will Review 5th Circuit Decision On Specialty License Plates

As reported by SCOTUS blog, yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Walker v. Sons of Confederate Veterans, (Docket No. 14-144, cert. granted 12/5/2014). (Order List). In the case, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held in a 2-1 decision that messages on state specialty license plates are private speech, not government speech.  The majority also concluded that the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles Board engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination when it rejected a specialty plate design that included the Confederate battle flag. Texas rejected the design because many members of the public found it offensive.  (See prior posting.) The petition for certiorari focused on two issues-- whether messages and images on specialty plates are government speech; and whether denial of a plate can involve viewpoint discrimination if the state never issued a plate expressing a different message on the same subject.

Reporting on the Court's grant of cert., the Washington Post points out that the Court still has before it a petition for certiorari in ACLU v. Tata involving North Carolina's authorization of a "Choose Life" specialty plate while it refused to issue a pro-choice plate. (See prior posting.)

Cert. Petitions Begin To Be Filed In 6th Circuit Same-Sex Marriage Cases

Plaintiffs who lost in the 6th Circuit last week in their challenges to same-sex marriage restrictions in four states (see prior posting) are seeking Supreme Court review rather than an en banc rehearing by the full 6th Circuit. Petitions for certiorari were filed on Friday in:

• Henry v. Hodges (Ohio) (full text of petition)
• Tanco v. Haslem (Tennessee) (full text of petition)

Detroit Free Press says a petition is expected Monday in DeBoer v. Snyder  (Michigan). A petition will also be filed in the near future in Love v. Beshear (Kentucky). (HRC Blog).

Certiorari Denied In NYC Pregnancy Center and Texas Episcopal Church Property Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court today (Order List) denied review in two groups of cases of interest to Religion Clause readers.

The first involved a challenges to the New York City ordinance requiring pregnancy service centers to disclose various items to potential clients. The 2nd Circuit upheld (by a 2-1 vote) the requirement to disclose whether or not there is a licensed medical provider on staff. It unanimously struck down the requirements to disclose whether or not the center provides or refers out for abortion, emergency contraception and prenatal care, and a requirement to disclose that the New York health department encourages women who may be pregnant to consult a licensed medical provider. (See prior related posting.) The cases are Evergreen Association, Inc.  v. New York, NY, Docket No. 13-1462, cert. denied 11/3/2014) and Pregnancy Care Center v. New York, NY, (Docket No. 13-1504, cert. denied 11/3/2014). Reuters reports on the denial of review.

The Supreme Court also denied review in Episcopal Church v. Episcopal Diocese of New York, (Docket No. 13-1520, cert. denied 11/3/2014).  The petition involved related decisions by the Texas Supreme Court in two cases holding that the neutral principles approach must be used in deciding ownership of property of the break-away Fort Worth diocese. (See prior posting.) AP reports on the Supreme Court's action.

Justice Alito Gets Award From St. Thomas More Society

The St. Thomas More Society of Maryland yesterday presented U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito with its "Man for All Seasons Award."  According to The Daily Record, Catholic groups have particularly praised Alito for his majority opinion earlier this year in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores. The award was presented to Justice Alito at the Society's Red Mass Banquet.

Supreme Court Temporarily Stays Texas Abortion Clinic Restrictions

The U.S. Supreme Court this evening issued an Order (full text) in Whole Women's Health v. Lakey preventing portions of Texas' new regulation of abortion clinics from taking effect while a challenge to them is pending in the 5th Circuit. The 5th Circuit (full text of decision) had stayed the district court's injunction against enforcement of certain of the law's provision. As reported by SCOTUSblog, under the Supreme Court's ruling:

The state may not now enforce a requirement that all clinics in the state upgrade their facilities to be hospital-like surgical centers, even when they perform abortions only through the use of drugs, not surgery.  And it may not enforce, against the clinics in McAllen and El Paso, a requirement that all doctors performing abortions have privileges to admit patients to a hospital within thirty miles of the clinic.  That requirement can continue to be enforced elsewhere in Texas, the Court indicated.

Those two provisions, together, had reduced the number of clinics still operating in the state to seven, with an eighth soon to open.  At one time recently, Texas had forty-one clinics.  The Supreme Court’s action Tuesday will allow the reopening of thirteen closed clinics on Wednesday, lawyers for the clinics said.

Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito dissented.

9th Circuit's Invalidation of Idaho and Nevada Same-Sex Marriage Bans Temporarily Stayed By Justice Kennedy

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy today temporarily stayed the 9th Circuit's mandate yesterday invalidating same-sex marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada. (Full text of order.) Even though only Idaho officials applied for the stay, Justice Kennedy's to stays the 9th Circuit's mandate in the Nevada case as well. Nevada officials had withdrawn their answering briefs in the 9th Circuit, conceding that discrimination against same-sex couples is unconstitutional.  Justice Kennedy's order calls for those opposing the bans to file a response by 5 p.m. tomorrow. NPR reports on Justice Kennedy's action.

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Prison Beard Case; Full Transcript Available

The U.S. Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in Holt v. Hobbs, a case in which a Muslim inmate seeks for religious reasons to grow a one-half inch beard, in violation of Arkansas prison grooming rules. The prisoner asserts that RLUIPA affords him that right.  The transcript of the full oral argument is available from the Supreme Court's website. SCOTUSblog also has a lengthy report on the oral argument, saying:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sent a blunt message to prison officials planning a policy that limits the religious freedom of inmates:  it would be important to have a good reason for the restriction before it gets into court.  Trying to bolster the rationale at the lectern is not a promising strategy.

A lawyer for Arkansas prison officials found that out in two quick exchanges with Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., that came close to collapsing his case.

More Certiorari Denials From SCOTUS Yesterday

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court issued it usual long beginning-of-term list of cases in which it is denying review. (Order List). In addition to the already widely reported denial of certiorari in same-sex marriage cases from five states (see prior posting), the Court also denied certiorari in the following cases of interest:

• Mehanna v. United States, (Docket No. 13-1125). At issue was whether a citizen's political or religious speech may constitute provision of material support or resources to a Foreign Terrorist Organization. (1st Circuit's opinion in the case.)
• Freshwater v. Mount Vernon School District, (Docket No. 13-1311). In the case, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld the firing of a middle school science teacher for insubordination in failing to comply with orders to remove religious materials from his classroom. (See prior posting.)
• Pittman-Bey v. Celum, (Docket No. 13-10031). In the case, the 5th Circuit held that defendants had qualified immunity in a suit by a Muslim inmate who was not allowed to participate in Ramadan activities without first having participated in Jumu'ah services. (See prior posting.)

Supreme Court Denies Review In Same-Sex Marriage Cases From 5 States

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in seven same-sex marriage cases from 5 states that had been decided by various circuit courts. (Order List). All of the Circuit Court decision had invalidated bans on same-sex marriage and/or recognition of same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. The cases are:

Herbert v. Kitchen (Docket No. 14-124) (Utah)
Smith v. Bishop (Docket No. 14-136) (Oklahoma)
Rainey v. Bostic (Docket No. 14-153) (Virginia)
Schaefer v. Bostic (Docket No. 14-225) (Virginia)
McQuigg v. Bostic (Docket No. 14-251) (Virginia)
Bogan v. Baskin (Docket No. 14-277) (Indiana)
Walker v. Wolf (14-278) (Wisconsin)

AP reports on the Court's action.

Red Mass and Modernized Website Herald Opening of Supreme Court's 2014 Term

The Supreme Court's new term opens today.  To mark the occasion, the annual Catholic Red Mass was held yesterday in Washington's Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle.  According to the Legal Times, four of the Court's six Catholic Justices (Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas) and two of its three Jewish Justices (Breyer and Kagan) attended. So did a number of D.C. lower court judges.

Tomorrow the Court will hear oral arguments in a religious accommodation case-- Holt v. Hobbs.  At issue is whether the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act permits Arkansas to bar a Muslim prison inmate from growing a one-half inch beard. (See prior related posting.) All the briefs filed in the case are available from SCOTUSblog.

The Court usually issues a long list of certiorari denials on its first day of the term, and might grant review in additional cases as well.  Among the most closely watched are a number of petitions for review in same-sex marriage cases.

The Court also begins the Term displaying a revamped website with a modernized look and improved navigation features. (Court press release.)

Group Says Justice Ginsburg Made Improper Comment On Possible Review of Same-Sex Marraige Cases

Liberty Counsel issued a press release yesterday contending that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg violated the Judicial Code of Conduct in remarks she made to an audience at the University of Minnesota Law School.  Ginsburg apparently told the audience that there would be "no need for us to rush" in reviewing challenges to same-sex marriage bans if the 6th Circuit in four cases pending before it does not create a split among circuits by upholding the bans.  She continued saying that there would be "some urgency" to review if a split is created.  Liberty Counsel says that this amounted to comment on the merits of an impending case. Technically, the Judicial Conference's Code of Conduct is not binding on Supreme Court Justices.

Cert. Filed In Case of Police Officer Who Refused To Attend Appreciation Event In Mosque

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in Fields v. City of Tulsa.  In the case, the 10th Circuit dismissed a complaint filed by a Tulsa, Oklahoma police captain who was disciplined after he refused on religious grounds to comply with an order to arrange for two officers and a supervisor from his shift to attend a law enforcement appreciation day held at a mosque. American Freedom Law Center which represents plaintiff has more background on the case and links to all of plaintiff's pleadings.

32 States Ask Supreme Court To Grant Cert In Same-Sex Marriage Cases

As reported yesterday by AP, in two separate amicus briefs a total of 32 states have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari to decide on the constitutionality of state bans on same-sex marriage. Led by Massachusetts, 15 states that allow same-sex marriage joined a brief in Herbert v. Kitchen, the 10th Circuit case invalidating Utah's ban. (Full text of brief.) (Mass. AG press release.)  17 other states led by Colorado filed a brief in Rainey v. Bostic, the 4th Circuit Virginia case and Smith v. Bishop, the 10th Circuit Oklahoma case.

Cert. Petitions Filed In Oklahoma and Virginia Same-Sex Marriage Cases

Following quickly on the heels of Utah's Aug. 5 certiorari petition to the U.S. Supreme Court (see prior posting), certiorari petitions have been filed in two more same-sex marriage cases:

A petition (full text) was filed Aug. 6 in Smith v. Bishop, a case in which the 10th Circuit held that Oklahoma's ban on granting licences for same-sex marriages performed in the state is unconstitutional. (See prior posting.) Reporting on the petition, Lyle Denniston at SCOTUS Blog points out that this is the longest-running federal court challenge to same-sex marriage bans, having been filed in 2004.

On Aug. 8, a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed in Rainey v. Bostic. In the case, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, struck down Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage. (See prior posting.) Reporting on the petition, Lyle Denniston at SCOTUS Blog comments that: "The Virginia case has special symbolic significance, because that is the state that produced the case of Loving v. Virginia, in which the Supreme Court in 1967 struck down a state law barring marriage by couples of different races."

Utah Files First Cert Petition In Same-Sex Marriage Challenges

The state of Utah-- acting 6 weeks before its deadline-- yesterday became the first to file a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in the growing number of decisions striking down state bans on same sex-marriage. The petition (full text) in Herbert v. Kitchen urges Supreme Court review of the 10th Circuit's 2-1 decision (see prior posting), saying in part:

This case presents an immensely important question: whether the United States Constitution compels states to adopt a single marriage policy that every individual is allowed “to marry the person of their choice.”... The Tenth Circuit said yes and struck down Utah’s definition—statutorily enacted and adopted into the Utah Constitution by two-thirds of voters in a statewide referendum—that marriage is only between a man and a woman. That ruling deprives Utah citizens of the “fundamental right” to “act through a lawful electoral process,” ... and ignores that the Constitution says nothing about how states must define marriage.

Salt Lake Tribune reports on the filing, and SCOTUS Blog has more background.

Supreme Court Rejects Attempt By County Clerk To Appeal Pennsylvania Same-Sex Marriage Decision

As reported by SCOTUS Blog, on July 9 U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito denied an application for a stay filed by a Pennsylvania clerk of courts.  The applicant was seeking to intervene in a lawsuit decided by a district court in order to appeal the district court's invalidation of Pennsylvania's ban on same-sex marriage. State officials had declined to appeal.  The Supreme Court's docket entry in Santai-Gaffney v. Whitewood denying the application to intervene cited  the Court's denial of a stay last month in an attempt by the National Organization for Marriage to intervene to appeal the invalidation of Oregon's same-sex marriage ban.

Supreme Court In Post-Term Order Enjoins Non-Profit Contraceptive Accommodation, Pending Appeal

It turns out that the U.S. Supreme Court was not completely finished with its work last Monday.  Yesterday it granted an injunction to a religiously-affiliated liberal arts college that objects to complying with the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage accommodation for religious non-profits.  Wheaton College, which was denied a preliminary injunction by an Illinois federal district court (see prior posting), applied to Justice Kagan for an emergency injunction pending appeal. Justice Kagan referred the application to the full court. In an order issued last Monday, separate from the full Order List for the day, the Court issued a temporary injunction and called for a response by Wednesday.  On Thursday in Wheaton College v. Burwell, (S.Ct., July 3, 2014), in an unsigned order the court held:

If the applicant informs the Secretary of Health and Human Services in writing that it is a nonprofit organization that holds itself out as religious and has religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services, the respondents are enjoined from enforcing against the applicant the challenged provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and related regulations pending final disposition of appellate review. To meet the condition for injunction pending appeal, the applicant need not use the form prescribed by the Government, EBSA Form 700, and need not send copies to health insurance issuers or third-party administrators....

[T]he applicant has already notified the Government—without using EBSA Form 700—that it meets the requirements for exemption from the contraceptive coverage requirement on religious grounds. Nothing in this order precludes the Government from relying on this notice, to the extent it considers it necessary, to facilitate the provision of full contraceptive coverage under the Act.

In light of the foregoing, this order should not be construed as an expression of the Court’s views on the merits.

Justice Scalia noted that he concurs in the result. Justice Sotomayor, in a strongly worded dissent, Joined by Justices Ginsburg and Kagan, said in part:

[J]ust earlier this week in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., ... the Court described the accommodation as “a system that seeks to respect the religious liberty of religious nonprofit corporations while ensuring that the employees of these entities have precisely the same access to all [Food and Drug Administration (FDA)]-approved contraceptives as employees of companies whose owners have no religious objections to providing such coverage.” ...  Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word. Not so today. After expressly relying on the availability of the religious-nonprofit accommodation to hold that the contraceptive coverage requirement violates RFRA as applied to closely held for-profit corporations, the Court now, as the dissent in Hobby Lobby feared it might ... retreats from that position. That action evinces disregard for even the newest of this Court’s precedents and undermines confidence in this institution....

... I do not doubt that Wheaton genuinely believes that signing the self-certification form is contrary to its religious beliefs. But thinking one’s religious beliefs are substantially burdened—no matter how sincere or genuine that belief may be—does not make it so.

The Washington Post and SCOTUS Blog both report on the Court's action.